[c-nsp] LNS Alternatives

[CiscoNSP List]

Thanks James - Apologies for the non-inline replies, Im on phone, via Hotmail...lol, makes it difficult :)

Ill have another chat to Cisco, see what they can do for us....re Juniper, yes, I did look at them....my only issue is that we are only a small company, with all Cisco engineers...i.e. zero Juniper in-house knowledge...but Ill investigate further...if its a far cheaper option (And feature parity is equal or better), then Id be crazy not too....will be a difficult learning experience for us all(Mainly due to time constraints), but potentially worth it :)

Yes indeed re radius attributes etc....was scratching my head for a while wondering why the hell a basic dsl service wouldnt auth!...some mind boggling changes by Cisco lol

Thanks for the tip re QOS....will be doing a lot more testing in this area (As well as others!)

Cheers for all your feedback+help....much appreciated.

________________________________________
From: cisco-nsp <cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net> on behalf of James Bensley <jwbensley at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, 23 May 2016 7:28 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] LNS Alternatives

On 23 May 2016 at 10:03, CiscoNSP List <CiscoNSP_list at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Cheers James - We need them all(5), as our POPs are geographically VERY far apart lol......majority of our customers are eth based, and use DSL as either redundant link, or where eth/fibre not available.......unfortunately, they make a HUGE noise re latency(They are VERY latency conscious!)  when we tried a single LNS setup...i.e. All DSL tails terminating on the one LNS.....as an example, 2 sites, 1 kilometre apart, latency was over 120m/sec..if we had an LNS at that POP, latency would have been 30ish....hard pill to swallow, but when the noisy customers are spending lots of $ with you, it's best to keep them happy.

Hmm in that case, I would either shout loudly at Cisco to get a better
price, the ASR1001-X for say <1000 subscribers (assuming an even
distribution between PoPs) is rather pricey. Have you considered
Juniper too? You can do all the same stuff on MX's as far as I know,
we have MX480's running as LNS too. Just a thought.

> Regarding features and the "X" range...Ive played a bit now with our Lab 1006, and yes, definitely some "challenging"(insane!) differences between them and the 7200....geez the stupid no compression thing,  some reply attributes cause the ASR to use full VAI, which causes it to fail also, qos pre-classify under virt template also causes ASR to use full VAI(Again, causes it to fail).....damn, Cisco loved making the transition from 7200->ASR an easy one lol......Are there even more things I need to be aware of with the old 1001 vs the 1001-X series?(From your e-mail, sounds like there is?)

Yes the change in RADIUS attributes and using sub-interfaces et al. is
very annoying. We have managed to work around pretty much everything
however it was additional head ache caused by Cisco, the reasons for
which are (mostly) unknown to us.

They do work AS LNS/BNG, the ASR1000 series devices, I just cast
stress how much testing you must do first. We were having issues were
the couldn't make QoS changes without rebooting the box, so we needed
to get our configs exactly right and fully testd before any traffic
goes live.

Cheers,
James.
_______________________________________________
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/