[c-nsp] ASR vs 6807

[Chris Welti]

Hi Brian,

no ES/SIP cards needed. This is on a simple WS-X6704-10GE card.
It has been working for years already, lowest version tested was on 12.2(33)SRE6.
Please note that you can not do VPLS with the Sup720, this is just for simple P2P tunnels (EoMPLS).

Regards,
Chris

On 28/11/14 09:24, b.turnbow at twt.it wrote:
> Hi Chris
>
> Don't you still need es/sip cards for this ?
> If it has changed it would be great.
>
> Thanks
>
> Brian
>
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> you can also do port-to-subint on the Sup720 using ethernet interworking:
>>
>> one end:
>>
>> interface TenGigabitEthernet3/2
>>    xconnect y.y.y.y 1 encapsulation mpls
>> end
>>
>> the other:
>>
>> interface TenGigabitEthernet4/2.2010
>>    encapsulation dot1Q 2010
>>    xconnect x.x.x.x 1 pw-class atom-eth-iw end
>>
>> The magic is in the pw-class atom-eth-iw:
>>
>> pseudowire-class atom-eth-iw
>>    encapsulation mpls
>>    interworking ethernet
>>
>> We're using that in production and it works just fine.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>>
>> On 27/11/14 12:10, Simon Lockhart wrote:
>>> In simple terms (and I apologise if this is fixed in Sup2T, as most of
>>> my experience has been on the Sup720), with the 6500/6800 platform,
>>> you can only do port-to-port or subint-to-subint VPWS, but not
>>> port-to-subint (which you can on the more capable boxes, or with the ES
>> cards on the 6500/6800).
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>> On Thu Nov 27, 2014 at 11:05:18AM +0000, R LAS wrote:
>>>> Hi Simon
>>>> can you detail more "ASR9k can be more flexible on EoMPLS (VPLS) than
>> 6807" ?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>>> Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 10:26:55 +0000
>>>>> From: simon at slimey.org
>>>>> To: dim0sal at hotmail.com
>>>>> CC: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>>>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ASR vs 6807
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu Nov 27, 2014 at 10:18:41AM +0000, R LAS wrote:
>>>>>> Discussing a new architecture of DCI (Data Center Interconnection),
>>>>>> Cisco raccomends both ASR9k and 6807.  The architecture requested
>>>>>> by the customer forecast MPLS/VPLS supported by DCI.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   From pricing point of view there is a quite big difference (win
>>>>>> 6807), from feature point of view Cisco says the difference is
>>>>>> "only" the number of mac-addresses supported and the sw modularity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can anybody help in digging more the "technical" difference ?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm going through much the same at the moment, and settling on 6807,
>>>>> largely from a price perspective.
>>>>>
>>>>> ASR9k is (today) a more capable box for routing - particularly if
>>>>> you want higher bandwidths. ASR9k has 100G ports today. 6807 only
>>>>> has 40G. ASR9k can be more flexible on EoMPLS (VPLS) than 6807.
>>>>>
>>>>> 6807 has a lot of potential (880G per slot), but it's not supported
>>>>> by either Supervisors or Linecards that are available today (current limit
>> is 80G/slot).
>>>>>
>>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>
>
>