[c-nsp] Carrier's Carrier and Layer 2 VPN question

[David Freedman]

Mendoza, Jon wrote:
> Hello everyone, 
> 
>  
> 
> I just question that someone may lend their insight or opinion.  I have
> a customer who is looking to use Level 3 layer 2 VPN service to connect
> their backbone POPS.  So instead of the traditional PTP WAN links or OC
> links, they are going to use MPLS Layer 2 VPNs.  The handoff from Level
> 3 is Gig E.  Now the question is, the company has several customers who
> would like to use the newly implemented backbone to tie in their remote
> sites (these customers have existing connection to the POPs already,
> either with NxT1s or metro Ethernet).  The thought that I have is that
> since the handoff from Level 3 is Ethernet and transparent (for the most
> part), couldn't they configure either pseudowires or L2TPv3 themselves
> and offer this to their customers? 

Providing the underlying pseudowire has sufficient MTU to transport such 
services, yes, this is indeed possible.

  So if customer A has a site in LA
> and Dallas, they can configure a tunnel with some sort of SLA on speeds
> and delivery to the customer to hand-off an Ethernet connection or a WAN
> connection?  

I like CsC, its quite elegant and carries with it less overhead than 
carrying pseudowires over pseudowires.

It of course uses the carrier's routing policy which may be preferable 
in some instances to static pseurowires (which shift during routing 
failure) or VPLS instances which may have broadcasting constraints in 
place to protect the carrier's infrastructure.


> 
>  
> 
> The customer has Junipers and OSR 7600s in the network backbone.  Any
> thoughts on this idea?  I am researching this type of product and would
> like to get opinions and thoughts.
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks!
> 
>  
> 
> Jon
> 
>  
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>