[c-nsp] 7609 DHCP alternatives - EVC / Subinterfaces

[Rob Shakir]

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:53:46AM +0300, Victor Lyapunov wrote:
> Both configurations seem to achieve the same effect but I am not sure which one
> is the preferable for large amount of traffic / subscribers.
> 
> For example due to the bridge domain I would expect that the first
> alternative will
> create more entries in the mac-address table.

Victor,

Whilst it doesn't directly relate to this problem the large number of
subscribers that you mention, we have examined what the best way forward for
terminating a number of ethernet access customers on ES/ES+ cards at a CPOC lab.

The overwhelming advice from Cisco (both our SE and a couple of DE that we
talked to) was that there was more flexibility in using EVCs rather than routed
subifs. There are a few features, especially in terms of QoS, that are supported
on EVC and not on subinterfaces.

I guess this argument is only really valid if you have any requirement to
support different features ongoing -  we're currently using routed subifs with
no problems in a couple of deployments.

Kind regards,
Rob

-- 
Rob Shakir                      <rjs at eng.gxn.net>
Network Development Engineer    GX Networks/Vialtus Solutions
ddi: +44208 587 6077            mob: +44797 155 4098
pgp: 0xc07e6deb                 nic-hdl: RJS-RIPE

This email is subject to: http//www.vialtus.com/disclaimer.html