[c-nsp] Cisco iWAN Solution

[Pavel Skovajsa]

Hello Ranjith,

The IWAN solution is relatively new, so you will not find a lot of people
with experience with it.

I do not have any practical experience running an IWAN network, but I spent
quite some time looking at the IWAN architecture and design. My opinion is
that on one side the IWAN solution lowers the cost of branch site circuits,
but significantly increases the technical and operational complexity of the
WAN CE routers. This is a perfect move from Cisco since just by principle
their routers with more complexity inside can be more expensive. Hence the
solution "moves" the cost around from circuits (non cisco business) to
routers (cisco business) and strengthens Cisco position.

Obviously this depends on your definition of what is "complex" and what is
"not complex". You can argue can that various "IWAN single pane of glass"
mgmt tools make this solution "less complex" by presenting a nice clean
GUI,  but all those tools do is hide complexity for casual user. All I know
is that IWAN is not a simple feature that you "turn on and forget about" -
it completely changes how routing works.

Also there are interesting operational issues that are probably much harder
to fix in IWAN world. For example the customer calls you and tells you that
yesterday at 9:35AM their application did not work in SiteA. How would you
know which path the traffic took? It is dynamic, so how would you
troubleshoot?

Now to your questions:
>How good is the PFR feature for load balancing effectively among multiple internet
links
PFR is traditionally excellent in this, without configuration it actually
loadbalances almost precisely 50/50.

>How good is the Cisco WAAS and akamai connect for the WAN acceleration
As good as any WAAS box or proxy solution:)

>all the traffic from remote site should make use of the local internet
links to reach the proxy server on cloud Although various cisco documents
states PFR will work for Direct internet access
If I understand correctly what you are asking is whether PFR works for
Direct Internet Access. No, it does not, my understanding is that PFR only
works inside the DMVPN cloud inside the Enterprise. The reason is simple -
PFR not only changes the forward path, but also the return path, hence you
need full control of both sides.

My 2 cents, comments or corrections welcome, I would be interested in
others opinion and experience as well,

-pavel skovajsa






On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Ranjith R <ranjithrnair at gmail.com> wrote:

> ​Hi .
>
> Can anyone please provide inputs on the Cisco iWAN solution .
>
> Thanks,
> Ranjith​
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 12:11 AM, Ranjith R <ranjithrnair at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello Folks ,
> >
> > We are in the process of evaluating Cisco iWAN solution , would like to
> > gather opinions about the solution with the below requirement
> >
> > How good is the PFR feature for load balancing effectively among multiple
> > internet links
> >
> > How good is the Cisco WAAS and akamai connect for the WAN acceleration
> >
> > We have a cloud based proxy solution and all the traffic from remote site
> > should make use of the local internet links to reach the proxy server on
> > cloud Although various cisco documents states PFR will work for Direct
> > internet access , there has been contradictory information on the same .
> >
> > Could you guys share your valuable inputs if any ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks in Advance ,
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ranjith
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>