[c-nsp] MPLS down to the CPE

Mark Tinka mark.tinka at seacom.mu
Fri Jul 5 16:16:53 EDT 2013

On Tuesday, March 05, 2013 03:23:43 PM Saku Ytti wrote:

> Not at all. But adding MPLS to customer would increase
> our exposure.

At $previous_job, this was a serious consideration, mostly 
because the customers were starting to pressure ISP's into 
making redundancy not only native, but usable without much 
input from the customer.

Redundancy at Layer 2 (which is how we normally deliver the 
last mile) is difficult at best. So throwing an MPLS-capable 
CPE device into the customer's location made sense. But as 
others have pointed out, issues such as security, size of 
IGP growth, cost, e.t.c., are all a factor to consider.

Moreover, if I were going to deploy an MPLS-capable device 
in a building, I'd like to be able to re-use it for other 
customers in the vicinity, otherwise it's a waste of money 
and good ports, given back then, there was nothing small 
enough that supported MPLS and cost peanuts for this kind of 
massive deployment.

I suppose the ASR901 could be considered small enough now, 
but the idea of adding a CPE device to my backbone that I 
will use for only one customer, among other risks, just 
doesn't bode well.

I'm all for being tough with customers and getting them to 
manage their own redundancy.

-------------- 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/20130705/10ccd81f/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list