On Thu, 21 Feb 2002, Christopher A. Woodfield wrote:
> There's no reason to use frame-relay encapsulation unless you're actually going
> through a frame network.
>
> For point-to-point circuits, from Cisco to Cisco, HDLC is the best choice, but
> it's proprietary (although Juniper has a Cisco HDLC mode). For
> anything else, I'd recommend PPP.
>From what I recall, once LCP is established, PPP and HDLC have about the
same amount of overhead. I could be wrong. PPP's finite-state machine is
substantially more complex than HDLC's to account for PPP multilink,
encryption, etc, but that would mostly be in the part of the machine that
gets executed prior to or as a part of establishing LCP.
The PPP vs HDLC topic flares up every once in awhile on comp.dcom.sys.cisco.
A Google search should turn up lots of reading on the subject.
jms
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 01:46:44PM -0500, Gyorfy, Shawn wrote:
> >
> > Since the topic exploded, what are your opinions on encapsulation of leased
> > line DS3s. We currently use Frame Relay for out Point to Point DS3
> > connections. Personally, I don't know why we use FR as our encapsulation,
> > and so the question to all. If you are running Cisco to Cisco, would it be
> > wise to run HDLC or PPP? Our DS3s' here are hardly maxed out, 15% or so, so
> > I'm not complaining about the few extra bits I can squeeze out them but
> > maybe that 15% can shrink to 10% with less overhead. Opinions or examples
> > of life appreciated.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:13:05 EDT