[c-nsp] best for IPTV: pure L3 multicast, Draft Rosen MVPN or MLDP based MVPN?

[adam vitkovsky]

Unfortunately the Q1'13 is a bit late for our project where we'd like to implement this on as9k's and me3600x and -cx
Even though NG-MVPN is really cool technology  I wonder whether the Cisco's implementation of NG-MVPN is going to be mature enough when implemented on as9k and me3600 -i.e. how much did they learn from other's players mistakes in this field

The most appealing I find about the NG-MVPN is the ability to utilize mpls and its protection mechanisms 

I believe the MoFRR is not going to be feasible with me3600x acting as PE in some locations 
-so possibly we could use the p2mp mpls-te in the global table -just for the protected distribution of IPTV and draft Rosen to carry customer multicast traffic

adam

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka
Sent: Sunday, May 13, 2012 10:35 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] best for IPTV: pure L3 multicast, Draft Rosen MVPN or MLDP based MVPN?

On Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:48:02 PM Sašo Pirnat wrote:

> we are using c7600 and draft-rosen for more then 5 years now, without 
> any major problems. Now we have migrated core routers to juniper mx 
> and we have to do some tweaks to work with cisco.

At previous employer, we had the opportunity to consider Rosen or NG-MVPN's (on Juniper kit).

NG-MVPN's were easier to deploy, because the core could be totally PIM-free (which is a big deal on the older Juniper kit, which need Tunnel PIC's to support Multicast - in the newer platforms, the Tunnel PIC's are integrated into the line cards, e.g., the MX-series routers).

NG-MVPN's are cool because:

	o You only run PIM on the Sender PE router (that
	  which is connected toward the Source).

	o Your core is PIM-free.

	o You only run PIM or IGMP on the Receiver PE
	  routers (those which are connected toward the
	  Receivers).

	o You signal the data plane via p2mp RSVP-TE or mLDP
	  (i.e., MPLS). So no need for IP/GRE, although it
	  is an option.

	o The solution behaves like an l3vpn. While
	  Multicast is the application, it is "network-
	  based", meaning that the deployment is actually
	  Unicast in nature, but traffic is forwarded in a
	  Multicast fashion.


Cisco are planning full NG-MVPN support in Q1'13 on the ASR9000. I think the ASR1000's will be getting support somewhere around there too, although Cisco are trying to force mLDP down our throats, and fuffing about on implement p2mp RSVP-TE support, along with BGP C-Multicast support. 
But they'll get there, they'll have no choice, just like BGP signaling for VPLS was introduced on the ASR9000 after much hullabaloo.

Cheers,

Mark.

_______________________________________________
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/