The MPLS-OPS Archive

[Vlad Bistea <vlad.bistea@gmail.com>]

Hi,
I made a interoperability test between cisco and huawe for mid-end routers.
MPLS LDP
MPLS L3VPN
MPLS L2VPN (not interoperability only H-H)
- CCC (local,remote)
- SVC
- MARTINI
- KOMPELA
If you are interested in some scenario or configs let me know

±Ç½Ãȯ wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I¡¯m going to test interoperability between Cisco¡¯s and other vender¡¯s
> for IP and MPLS.
>
> Do you have any test scenario or test results to share?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* Lyle Williams [mailto:lyle.williams@bigpond.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, April 16, 2005 8:14 PM
> *To:* mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
> *Subject:* [MPLS-OPS]: Re: : Multi-vendor in MPLS domain
>
> I've just come back from a 2547 course where the vendor's (I won't
> name them yet) idea of what LDP "Downstream Unsolicited" was _wildly_
> different from what I have seen from Cisco and Juniper.
>
> I've seen interoperability reports that say that (unnamed vendor's)
> 2547 interworks with Cisco and Juniper, but based on what I saw last
> week I can't see that this can be so.
>
> The vendor's ISIS implementation was also crap. It wouldn't choose the
> correct route without an operator bouncing the correct outbound
> interface. So much for dynamic routing. We were allegedly working with
> production code.
>
> Don't assume that things will interwork. Don't accept test results
> from anyone you don't trust.
>
> Lyle Williams
>
> 16APR05
>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
> Thamir,
>
> For the most part, vendor products are RFC compliant should interoperate.
>
> However, in some cases they do not. In particular, If you are running LDP
>
> pay attention to ¡°modes of operation¡± which is simply: DU vs DoD,
> Ordered vs Independent, and Conservative vs Liberal retention.
>
> Some combinations may cause abnormal behaviour in regards to label
> binding and release.
>
> Joe
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Thamir M.Al Hammad [mailto:thammad@stc.com.sa]
> *Sent:* Monday, April 04, 2005 12:33 AM
> *To:* vishwanathan mv; mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
> *Subject:* RE: [MPLS-OPS]: Multi-vendor in MPLS domain
>
> Thanks Padmini for your prompt replay,
>
> But what services you are running? Any NGN?
>
> Do you have mix of PEs? Or mix of Ps (mix in the core)?
>
> Br,
>
> Thamir
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* vishwanathan mv [mailto:cheerfulmvp@yahoo.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, April 04, 2005 6:09 AM
> *To:* Thamir M.Al Hammad
> *Subject:* Re: [MPLS-OPS]: Multi-vendor in MPLS domain
>
> Yes of course its practical. We in India very much have this kind of
> configuration and things work fine provided you find the compatible
> routers.
>
> - Padmini
>
> */"Thamir M.Al Hammad" <thammad@stc.com.sa>/* wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     I want to know your opinion regarding running MPLS from
>     multi-vendors, is it practical? I mean the PE from vendor and the
>     P from other vendor or mix of PEs and Ps from different vendors?
>     Specially, in NGN environment where no doubt about TE, QoS, L2VPN
>     & multicasting.
>
>     I am afraid about this because I think any of these technologies
>     still draft in IETF and there are different philosophies from
>     different vendors.
>
>     Do you know any case which successful or failed? Any white paper?
>     What is the possible risk?
>
>     Br,
>
>     Thamir Alhammad
>
>     Disclaimer: The information in this email and in any files
>     transmitted with it,
>     is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential
>     and/or privileged material.
>     Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you
>     receive this in error,
>     please contact the sender immediately and delete the material from
>     any computer.
>     If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
>     distribution or
>     any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is
>     strictly prohibited.
>     Statement and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the
>     sender, and do not
>     necessarily reflect those of STC.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Make Yahoo! your home page
>
> Disclaimer: The information in this email and in any files transmitted
> with it,
> is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or
> privileged material.
> Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you receive
> this in error,
> please contact the sender immediately and delete the material from any
> computer.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or
> any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is strictly
> prohibited.
> Statement and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the
> sender, and do not
> necessarily reflect those of STC.
>

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml

MPLScon 2005 - May 16-19, NYC, NY
http://www.mplscon.com/