[c-nsp] L2TPv3 vs. VPLS

Tue Sep 20 11:22:07 EDT 2005

VPLS Implementations

There are two leading VPLS drafts currently being discussed in the IETF that
the majority
of vendors are considering from an implementation perspective. The first is
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kompella-ppvpn-vpls-01.txt,
called "draft Kompella," submitted by Kireeti Kompella. 
The second is
http://www.ietf.org/internetdrafts/draft-lasserre-vkompella-ppvpn-vpls-02.tx
t, called "draft Lasserre-Vkompella," submitted by Mark Lasserre and Vach
Kompella. 

Each of these three models can be described in turn by two fundamental
characteristics:
-Auto-Discovery-What method is used that enables multiple provider edge
routers(PE) participating in a VPLS domain to find each other.
-Signaling-What protocol is used to set up MPLS tunnels and distribute
labels between PEs for packet demultiplexing purpose.

VPLS Implementation Model Discovery Signalling
Draft Kompella 		      BGP       BGP
Draft Lasserre-Vkompella	None      LDP

To make long story short Juniper uses first draft
Cisco uses second

P.S. It's really fan to see Kireeti and Vach Kompella talking about this
stuff :) 

--
Jeff Tantsura  CCIE# 11416
Senior IP Network Engineer

-----Original Message-----
From: Vincent De Keyzer [mailto:vincent at dekeyzer.net] 
Sent: 19 September 2005 11:05
To: 'Bob Arthurs'
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] L2TPv3 vs. VPLS

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/
> 

_______________________________________________
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/