[c-nsp] ME 3600X questions

[Waris Sagheer (waris)]

The platform is capable of your requirement (EoMPLS/VPLS) and back to
back topology has been tested internally.

-Waris


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Vincent Touchard
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 3:30 AM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME 3600X questions

Yes, kind of patch panel, with one interface per "department".

The goal is to extend site A to site B during their move.
On the LAN side, one interface per "department" and several vlans per
interface. We do not control the network of the departments (number of
vlans, vlan ids, size of broadcast domains, ...).
Solution #1 whould be to do QinQ, with one outer vlan per department.

One concern is the potential broadcast implied by large broadcast
domains spread accross the 2 sites.

We also need to do some QOS to allocate a minimum bandwidth to each
department, and possibly do more granular QOS per departement based on
DSCP/COS/L4 fields coming from the LAN.

We are considering EoMPLS/VPLS as an alternative to QinQ, but have
little
to no experience with it.

Regards,
Vincent


On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 07:59:29PM +1000, Ian Henderson wrote:

> On 02/09/2011, at 5:45 PM, Arie Vayner (avayner) wrote:
> 
> > Why do you want to do this?
> > What is the objective?
> > 
> > If these are 2 back-to-back switches, why not just switch?
> 
> A 'very long patch panel' (whatever comes in, goes out) service? Have
done this with both QinQ/L2PT (3750G) and EoMPLS (Junpier EX4200).

_______________________________________________
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/