[c-nsp] ISP / MPLS "POP" design

[Mark Tinka]

On Saturday, November 09, 2013 10:26:15 PM CiscoNSP List 
wrote:

> Very interesting - Im liking this as a solution! Ive had
> a look at the ME3600X (Are you using the ME-3600X-24TS?
> i.e. you dont require the "CX" version for L3 + L2
> VPNs?), and you need Advanced Metro IP Access?

We generally use the -FS version since it's easier turn 
optical ports into copper ports than the other way around 
:-).

We don't use the -CX version because, for me, it was a bit 
of a let-down. When the -CX chassis came out, I was hoping 
for a 1U or 1.5U chassis with 48x Gig-E ports, since the 24-
port unit, while very nice, is not dense enough for me.

That said, the -CX is modular and can handle a little more 
traffic. But it's also larger if you're deploying in places 
that have space constraints. For me, it's the kind of box 
you'd deploy for mobile networks that need E1/DS3/e.t.c. 
hand-off with an Ethernet backhaul. In my case, the 1U 
systems are better because we're Ethernet-centric, in the 
core and customer-facing.

For the ME3600X, don't forget to ask for the 10Gbps license 
if you need the uplinks to run at that rate, and also for 
the Advanced Metro IP Access license if you want full 
IP/MPLS/Ethernet features.

> So in this scenario, we would replace the 4848's with
> ME3600X's, and all L3(VRF) config would be done on the
> 3600X's (Carrier AGG's would still terminate on the
> 3600X's)

Yep.

You then don't have to worry about all the issues you've 
been raising these past days, as the ring interconnecting 
the switches to your core are IP/MPLS-based, and you can 
offer IP-based and MPLS-based services to customers directly 
off the ports on the ME3600X switch, without having to 
tunnel upstream to a PE router.

The ME3600X also acts exactly like a router for important 
features like QoS (both directions), EVC's, e.t.c. So you're 
not sacrificing features by not going the traditional Layer 
2 Metro-E model.

> Both 3600X's would be connected, plus have mesh to the
> P's? And run OSPF/MPLS and TE on these links?

Exactly.

> I dont have access to pricing atm, but are the 3600X's a
> "lot" more expensive than 4948's?

IMHO, for all the features and benefits that this platform 
brings to a Metro-E and ring-based Access architecture, it's 
excellent value for money.

I can't, obviously, disclose the pricing we get, but you'll 
be surprised to find it's a steal compared to what you're 
willing to pay for a brain-dead Ethernet switch.

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/20131110/8a4eed18/attachment.sig>