[c-nsp] L2TPv3 vs. VPLS

[Vincent De Keyzer]

Bob,

thanks for straightening things up - that's also the kind of answer I was
looking for.

Vincent


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bob Arthurs
> Sent: vendredi 16 septembre 2005 18:48
> To: onder.ergun at probil.com.tr
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] L2TPv3 vs. VPLS
> 
> Another good one for L2VPNs  is Troubleshooting Virtual Private Networks.
> This is also by Cisco Press.
> 
> On the question of L2TPv3 versus VPLS, I think this question is a bit
> strange because there are now three VPLS drafts if I remember correctly.
> There's one that uses BGP for signalling the PWs (with MPLS encap for
> layer-2 frames), there's one that uses LDP for signalling the PWs (with
> MPLS
> encap for the l2 frames), and there's one that uses RADIUS for discovery
> and
> L2TPv3 for signalling and encap of l2 frames. I haven't heard of any
> vendor
> that has implemented the RADIUS/L2TPv3 draft, however.
> 
> I think it's not a choice between L2TPv3 and VPLS, but rather a choice
> between point to point and multipoint (VPLS/IPLS). Either of these models
> can use MPLS or L2TPv3 for encap.
> 
> 
> 
> >From: Vnder Erg|n (Probil-]stanbul)<onder.ergun at probil.com.tr>
> >To: "Tantsura, Jeff" <jtantsura at ugceurope.com>,        "Vincent De
> Keyzer"
> ><vincent at dekeyzer.net>,        <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> >Subject: RE: [c-nsp] L2TPv3 vs. VPLS
> >Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 15:09:19 +0300
> >
> >For those of you who are interested in Layer 2 VPN technologies, there is
> >an excellent book by Cisco Press, Layer 2 VPN Architectures ISBN:
> >1587051680
> >
> >
> >Onder Ergun
> >CCIE #14746
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> >[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Tantsura, Jeff
> >Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 12:17 PM
> >To: 'Vincent De Keyzer'; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >Subject: RE: [c-nsp] L2TPv3 vs. VPLS
> >
> >Vincent,
> >
> >If you don't need P2MP and don't have MPLS backbone in place don't even
> >consider VPLS, there are still some major limitations.
> >I think either L2TPv3 on layer 3 or QinQ on layer 2 would be suitable for
> >you. In the past I used L2TPv3 between 2x10720 to transport 4Gb L2
> traffic
> >between 2 IX's, worked just fine, the only issue we've had was MTU when
> >main
> >STM16 ring went down and L2TP tunnel was rerouted via Ethernet links.
> >
> >Hope this helps,
> >
> >--
> >Jeff Tantsura  CCIE# 11416
> >Senior IP Network Engineer
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Vincent De Keyzer [mailto:vincent at dekeyzer.net]
> >Sent: 16 September 2005 09:14
> >To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >Subject: [c-nsp] L2TPv3 vs. VPLS
> >
> >Ok,
> >
> >thanks to Jeff I now have a clearer view of what is VPLS.
> >
> >I see that VPLS has one advantage over L2TP: it's a point-to-multipoint
> >technology (which we might not really need). But it also has one
> drawback:
> >it requires building a MPLS backbone (which we don't have at the moment).
> >
> >Is this a correct analysis?
> >
> >Is anybody on this list using one of these two technologies to offer
> >Ethernet services over an IP backbone?
> >
> >Vincent
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tantsura, Jeff [mailto:jtantsura at ugceurope.com]
> > > Sent: jeudi 15 septembre 2005 14:18
> > > To: 'Vincent De Keyzer'; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > > Subject: RE: [c-nsp] AToM/L2TPv3/VPLS/etc.
> > >
> > > Vincent at all,
> > >
> > > Find attached VPLS presentation from MPLS World 2004 which explains
> > > quit good what VPLS is and how it's different from other technologies.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jeff Tantsura  CCIE# 11416
> > > Senior IP Network Engineer
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Vincent De Keyzer [mailto:vincent at dekeyzer.net]
> > > Sent: 15 September 2005 13:12
> > > To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > > Subject: [c-nsp] AToM/L2TPv3/VPLS/etc.
> > >
> > > Hello list,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I work for a company offering Internet access and LAN-to-LAN services
> > > over its own wireless network. Currently, we have an IP network over
> > > ATM, but would like to get rid of ATM. Luckily, there is some money
> > > available today.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > All our routers are Cisco (7206VXRs installed, 7600s budgeted). We
> > > want to offer Internet access with speeds from 1 to 34 Mbps (for a
> > > total of about 300 Mbps of transit capacity), and Ethernet services
> > > with speeds of 1 to 100 Mbps.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I have heard about AToM, L2TPv3, VPLS; but have very little
> > > understanding of those. I am wondering where to start to select the
> > > technology. So I would be very glad to read any ideas, pointers to
> > > good (high-level) documents, or real-life experiences that could help
> > > me with this (challenging to me) project.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Vincent
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >_______________________________________________
> >cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>