[c-nsp] Internet routing in a vendoe MPLS environment
Mark Tinka
mtinka at globaltransit.net
Mon Jul 11 22:09:20 EDT 2011
On Tuesday, July 12, 2011 04:31:02 AM Rick Martin wrote:
> We advertise 4
> full class B networks as /16's and one as two /17's. Our
> IP assignments are geographically distributed based on
> the Internet connection the customer will be using.
Classful routing is long dead.
So the correct notation is just "slash-16" or "slash-17" or
"slash-whatever" :-).
> We are in the bidding process for migrating to a vendor
> owned MPLS core network,...
So right now, you're managing your own Layer 3 routing, and
your 3rd party providers simply deliver Layer 2 transport.
Pretty stock.
When/if you migrate to this MPLS provider, are you saying
you will be ditching the Layer 2 transport for a Layer 3
interconnect with the new MPLS provider?
> I have discussed this with my Cisco team and they have
> come up with a couple of options the most compelling at
> this point is GRE tunnels from CE to primary and
> secondary Internet connections, run our own routing
> protocol over the tunnels to manage the default route.
This is why I never ask vendors to run me up solutions.
Eeeek!!!
> Is anybody else running this type of scenario? If so, how
> is it working for you?
>
> What are you doing to accomplish diverse Internet routing
> in a Vendor managed MPLS environment that is different?
I'm getting the inkling that you're switching to a Layer 3
transport with this new MPLS provider, and throwing out your
(simpler) Layer 2 hauls.
Before we start throwing out solutions, is it possible for
your MPLS provider to offer Layer 2 transport, much like you
have today, across their MPLS network? I'm assuming you're
choosing this MPLS provider to reduce your transport costs,
right?
Cheers,
Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20110712/72f30d80/attachment-0001.pgp>
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list