[c-nsp] End to end keepalive over QinQ provider

[Chris Evans]

Good option, but still comes back to having to move to a different service
offering..

The client is just limited by this base package of what the carrier
offers..  They're going to have to change either service offerings or get
smart and use L3 :)

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Adam Vitkovsky <adam.vitkovsky at swan.sk>wrote:

> How about running LACP with the 7600 and let the ISP to build just one PW
> (pipe) between your two endpoints rather than trying to bundle 2 pipes
> yourself.
>
>
> L2 end-to-end, Ethernet for that matter has so much potential like any
> other
> type of virtualization.
> It's just a pity that after having it around for so many years it's just
> recently becoming mature in its basic functionalities, not speaking about
> the advanced stuff like EVPN.
>
>
> adam
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Chris Evans
> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 8:11 PM
> To: Tim Jackson
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] End to end keepalive over QinQ provider
>
> Agreed.. L3 is the answer.. This is actually for a customer of mine that I
> consult for, so easier said than done to get them to switch. The provider
> can tunnel if it if you pay for the "plus" service which they don't want to
> do either..
>
> I haaatttee L2 extensions and curse any company that is helping to bring it
> back.. Mainly Cisco and VMWare!!
>
> Thx for the help all!
>
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Tim Jackson <jackson.tim at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Cisco 7600 won't tunnel LACP.. I wouldn't say strange equipment
> > doesn't do it. Lots of "normal" gear sucks at it. L2PT is bad, and all
> > of the gear is bad (and it should feel bad).
> >
> > One option would be to buy "cheap" ethenet NIDs that can do L2PT
> > tunneling to uncommon MAC addresses to avoid the underlying equipment
> > from eating the frames. Accedian/Adva/Overture/Probably others can all do
> that.
> >
> > Ethernet CFM could potentially do what you're after, but there's not
> > going to be a built in mechanism to disable a port, or take a port out
> > of the port-channel.
> >
> > Go L3 instead across your two links.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Ross Halliday <
> > ross.halliday at wtccommunications.ca> wrote:
> >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> > > > bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Chris Evans
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 1:19 PM
> > > > To: Adam Vitkovsky
> > > > Cc: cisco-nsp
> > > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] End to end keepalive over QinQ provider
> > > >
> > > > I have two paths that I'd like to port-channel. Since they don't
> > support
> > > > LACP the only thing I can do is do static configuration, but if
> > > > the
> > path
> > > > of
> > > > one of the links takes a hit there is no end to end notifications
> > > > that will cause an interface to go down or be taken out of
> > > > forwarding. With LACP you can do this because the ports will
> > > > debundle. I was hoping that CFM
> > would
> > > > take the path out of service, but I don't think that is the case.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > You mean the LACP negotiation is eaten by your provider? What kind
> > > of strange equipment/config are they running?
> > >
> > > UDLD is designed to do what you want - will that function?
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Ross
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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/
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>