The MPLS-OPS Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS-OPS Archive>month:2005-Jan> msg00002



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

RE: Re: Layer 2 MPLS VPN

  • From: Per Ole Klemetsrud <perole@kirurg.org>
  • Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2005 01:24:13 +0100 (CET)
  • cc: "'harpreet.singh@vsnl.co.in'" <harpreet.singh@vsnl.co.in>, "'mohd irwan'" <mplsvpn2004@yahoo.com>, mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
  • Resent-Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 19:51:23 -0500
  • X-X-Sender: perole@galaga.local

The day you have to move a couple of hundred customers from one PE to 
another PE, I'm quite sure that you (and your customers) wont find the 
idea of using BGP for signaling and auto-discovery silly, as opposed to 
manually reconfiguring a couple of hundred l2vpns times the number of 
PE's those l2vpns span.  About RR'r, nothing stops you from meshing your 
PE's to avoid the RR - not that is makes much sence, but you can certainly 
do it.

=) Per


On Sat, 1 Jan 2005, McCallum, Robert wrote:
> I personally don't agree with your thoughts.  BGP - yes it scales well, but
> for signalling??  So a signalling packet hits the RR which then reflects
> that signal to each end point??  That's slightly silly in my mind and I
> believe LDP will actually win in the long wrong.  Also I believe that the
> RFC/IETF bods are nearly edging towards LDP as the signalling protocol for
> vpls and such and in that instance the companies who have been arguing over
> BGP being better than LDP will have to rethink their strategy.
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Harpreet Singh [mailto:harpreet.singh@vsnl.co.in]
>> Sent: 30 December 2004 04:59
>> To: 'mohd irwan'; mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
>> Subject: RE: [MPLS-OPS]: Re: Layer 2 MPLS VPN
>>
>>
>> There are a few SPs in Asia which are offering L2 VPNs. From
>> a signaling perspective, however I feel that BGP is much more
>> scalable and flexible.
>>
>> With LDP, you would need a lot of targeted LDP sessions which
>> would not scale. You get into the conventional N square
>> problem. With BGP, you just have to have a MP BGP session
>> with a RR, which you need for a L3 VPN also. Having MPBGP for
>> signaling means using the same signaling for a host of
>> services L3/L2 which increases scalability.
>>
>> Further, the auto discovery features make MPBGP signaling a
>> better choice for provisioning.
>>
>> Regards
>> Harpreet Singh
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: mohd irwan [mailto:mplsvpn2004@yahoo.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 9:34 PM
>> To: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
>> Subject: [MPLS-OPS]: Re: Layer 2 MPLS VPN
>>
>> Good Day !!
>>
>> I'm Irwan from Kuala Lumpur,Malaysia. I would like to
>> know if there is any service provider have start the
>> Layer 2 MPLS VPN services.
>>
>> I can't find any of service provider in ASEAN Country
>> provide this services.
>>
>> I need this information for my Final Year Project
>> regarding Layer 2 MPLS VPN.
>>
>> I want to know which signalling is better from SP view
>> of point.
>>
>> Thank You
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Mohd Irwan
>> Bsc(Hons) Degree in Networking
>> Mara University of Technology
>>
> http://www.uitm.edu.my
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
>
> -------
> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
>
> -------
> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
>
> -------
> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
>

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