[c-nsp] Catalyst 6500/6800 suitable as PE in provider network (SUP2T)?

[Pshem Kowalczyk]

Hi,

Depending on your 10G requirements ASR903 might be an option (it
provides up to 4x10G + 15x1G) with redundant sups. It runs IOS XE.
Other option might be the 2 slot ASR9k - ASR9904
(http://d2zmdbbm9feqrf.cloudfront.net/2013/usa/pdf/BRKSPG-2684.pdf
slide 15). I personally wouldn't go with the 6x00 as it still feels
like the whole MPLS aspect of it (particularly L2 aspects of it) is
not at the core of the design of the platform.

kind regards
Pshem


On 22 August 2013 21:18,  <daniel.dib at reaper.nu> wrote:
>
>
> 2013-08-22 10:36 skrev Chris Russell:
>
>>> you missing any features
> compared to ME devices? Has VPLS been running well or have you had any
> issues?
>
>  The ME is a great little device.. and from my limited exposure
> to them
> "just works". Agree with you on the 10G ports. Brocades'
> addition of
> 4x10G to the CER-RT may push Cisco into looking at this
> again though.
>
>  One of the limitations we've found within VPLS on the
> C6K w/sup-2T is
> there are problems with l2 tunnelling of untagged
> packets - specifically
> STP/VTP/CDP. We were recommended the ASR (1K)
> instead of the C6K due to
> this but currently it`s looking like they
> have the same issue. The same
> config on an ME just works.
>
>  Both of the
> above currently raised with Cisco engineering teams
>
> Chris
>
> Thanks
> Chris!
>
> I agree the platform has really matured into something good and
> I really like the QoS features and buffers. I also heard that tunneling
> of BPDUs is troublesome on Cat 6500 which might be an issue. Thanks for
> the input!
>
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/