[c-nsp] Transparent LAN over Layer3

[Rens]

Hi,

I'm also looking into using L2TPv3

But I'm looking for a small cheap router that would support this.

I guess with either FastE mtu configurable or with GigE ports to avoid
fragmentation?

Thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart
Sent: mercredi 1 octobre 2008 13:39
To: 'John van Oppen'; 'Robert Boyle'; 'Michael K. Smith'; 'cisco-nsp'
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Transparent LAN over Layer3

Thanks guys... I hadn't head much about l2tpv3 "in the wild" from actual
users.... good to hear from folks actually using it a lot - that makes it
easier for me to make some decisions...

Best regards, thanks to everyone for onlist and offlist replies...

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: John van Oppen [mailto:john at vanoppen.com] 
Sent: October 1, 2008 4:07 AM
To: Robert Boyle; Paul Stewart; Michael K. Smith; cisco-nsp
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Transparent LAN over Layer3

I would second that as well.   We use l2tpv3 all over the place, with
Ethernet.   We mostly do it with 7200VXRs as endpoints but I have a few
12000s running with OC48s as "tunnel server cards" and those work nicely
as well and it is a quite elegant solution when MPLS is not possible or
only rather simple transport functionality is required.



John van Oppen
Spectrum Networks LLC
206.973.8302 (Direct)
206.973.8300 (main office)


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Robert Boyle
Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 7:39 PM
To: Paul Stewart; 'Michael K. Smith'; 'cisco-nsp'
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Transparent LAN over Layer3

At 10:20 PM 9/30/2008, Paul Stewart wrote:
>Yes, we own the end to end network however it's a routed network in
those
>segments...
>router-->router-->router-->switch-->switch-->router-->router-->router--
>rout
>er specifically...;)
>
>If we could hand them off a few VLAN's we would just do that and not
even
>use Q-in-Q unless we really needed to... but basically I'm looking for
>layer2 transport via layer3 devices...  and there's no option for MPLS
in
>this setup...

Take a look at L2TPv3. We use it for all kinds of crazy transport 
here. Taking a T1 from one city and one carrier and delivering it to 
a customer in our datacenter, handing ATM PVCs off from one router to 
another ATM PVC on another router 100 miles away. We haven't used it 
for Ethernet, but that sure seems a lot less complicated than the 
things we are doing. Anything you put in on one side is transparently 
trunked to the other side. It works great and gives you many of the 
benefits of MPLS without the need to have a network which supports 
MPLS end to end. It is especially useful for small POPs and locations 
with older gear.

-Robert



Tellurian Networks - Global Hosting Solutions Since 1995
http://www.tellurian.com | 888-TELLURIAN | 973-300-9211
"Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin

_______________________________________________
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/