[c-nsp] MPLS PE Routers for a Mobile Carrier?

[Saku Ytti]

On (2008-08-04 11:59 -0400), Stephen Fulton wrote:

> > WAN being SIP (be careful with ES20).
>
> Would you mind elaborating on that?  I'm leaning toward the ES20 at the  
> moment for our needs..

My biggest pain, lack of vlan local significance, so if you have 
same VLAN on two different interfaces you need to terminate it to some
unique SVI. And if you terminate it to SVI, and still want to benefit
from ES20 QoS features, you need to do QoS on the EVC, and on EVC
you have only very few match statements, namely match CoS, no match
ACL or anything.

On first thought, match CoS may be enough. But if you'd want to
just shape all traffic to 5Mbps, you'd have to use 'class-default',
as you can't use ACL with 'ANY'. And if you use class-default, you
reduce the amount of VRF customers you can terminate on the box
(you run out of the 4k VLAN sooner) and you reduce
pps performance (additional lookup for first 512 VRF's).

Also no uRPF/strict and uRPF/loose per interface. All these limitations
puzzle me, as it appears to be SIP600, and SIP600 has vlan local
significance and uRPF per port.
Talk to your SE/AM, hopefully there is something new coming with same
price and better feature parity with 'real' WAN cards. (+EVC magic)


>
> -- Stephen
>
>
> Saku Ytti wrote:
>> On (2008-08-02 17:52 -0300), Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> AFAIK, ASR 1000 or 4500/Sup6-E don't support MPLS in current software
>>> releases, so your Cisco-land options are ISR 38x5, 6500, 7600 and
>>
>> I believe ASR1k did MPLS and L3 MPLS VPN in FCS. Only large bit
>> missing was L2 MPLS VPN's which is coming in release3 iirc.
>>
>>> 12000. ME6524 seems a good fit for this environment, J-2320/6350 could
>>> be the J-land options to explore (although ISR 38x5 are their
>>> counterparts at C-land, not the ME6524).
>>
>> QoS in PE and catalyst doesn't seem good fit to me. Unless you have
>> dedicated port to each customer. But in view most all PE usages
>> include customers in VLAN, in which case, to do any QoS, you need HQoS, 
>> which LAN cards can not do. They are cheap for a reason.
>> While in LSR/P role, LAN cards are perfect fit. It's quite backwards
>> really, you want 'WAN' cards to face your distribution and LAN
>> cards are fine in all core, except if you want to do VPLS,
>> in which case LER/PE needs WAN card to core too.
>>
>> WAN being SIP (be careful with ES20).
> _______________________________________________
> 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/

-- 
  ++ytti