[c-nsp] Cisco 6500 VLAN Question

[Mark Tinka]

On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 09:40:22 PM Chris Gotstein 
wrote:

> We use an appliance to control bandwidth and setup
> packages for our customers, so it needs to be in the
> location it's at so I can feed it multiple connections
> from different areas.  It wasn't as big of a deal when
> all our connections came through a single backhaul, but
> now we are adding additional fiber connections that all
> need to go through this one box.

This is the problem of using appliance-based bandwidth 
managers.

In my experience, they are great when:

	- All your customers are ONLY trying to get to the
	  Internet.

	- You have one router connecting you to your
	  upstream.

	- You don't have hardware redundancy in your core or	
	  peering edge.

	- You don't have traffic going out other routes like
	  peering.

	- Your customers don't talk to each other, so there
	  isn't a need to manage bandwidth between them.

When all the above stops being the case, particularly when 
you grow and your customers start demanding circuits that 
remain on-net, or when you start popping up in different 
locations to peer and/or buy additional transit for multi-
homing, you quickly realize that taking advantage of QoS 
features for bandwidth management inside the routers (and 
close to the edge as possible) is a much more scalable 
approach.

If I were you, I'd start doing this now...

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- 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/20130619/568ae077/attachment.sig>