[c-nsp] Multihomed OTV on CSR Lab - Mac Address Issue

[Mark Tinka]

On 5/Feb/18 16:01, adamv0025 at netconsultings.com wrote:


> When I started in networking I was setting up p2p leased lines between
> csu/dsu boxes (t-shooting fractional T1s and stuff on DSX cross-connects).
> Then we were migrating these to FR or ATM circuits. And then we were
> migrating FR/ATM to MPLS cause MPLS was any to any. And heck couple years
> later there are requests from customers to go back to these p2p circuits
> (using PW over MPLS) to close the circle. 
> So back in the days it could happen that the links between MPLS devices
> where set up over FR network(which in itself was built on top of these
> leased lines) and you'd have customers being migrated off of the very same
> FR network to MPLS just to ask for the same setup they have with FR i.e. hub
> and spoke p2p links and own IP routing, so what they got at the end was
> product based on VPWS.
> This was before the Carrier Ethernet became a thing -where we sell p2p
> Ethernet links for SPs to build their MPLS backbones on top and don't need
> to lease, well not T1s but fibre/lambdas. 
> So here we are, couple years and overlay headers later still doing the same
> thing. 

It all eventually comes back around, in some form or other, as you
highlight.

Vendors want to keep themselves busy, so there will always be a "hit"
technology that makes it "easier" to do the same thing we've always been
doing. The reason it becomes a thing is because operators get excited
because of new technology, but more importantly, "it" promises to be
cheaper to deploy and manage, which translates into "cheaper to buy",
and then it catches on.

Use the technology long enough for a specific application, and that use
gets a new name (and acronym to boot). Once a new name/acronym has been
established, vendors and other interested parties find a new way to
re-describe the same technology as being applicable to a specific
use-case, and re-build it in such a way to suit that particular
application at a much more fundamental level - purpose-built software
and hardware in tow.

And on and on, the ride spins.

This is not even accounting for the 5 largest content houses that are
driving the strategy for equipment manufacturers.

The talent is amongst operators knowing when a technology is just a fad,
and not buying into it. For me, that was, and always has been, VPLS.
Segment Routing is another one, but let me not start a war.

In 2013, at a meeting in Paris, it was touted that MPLS had reached its
end-of-life and was going to become obsolete to die in favor of skinnier
overlays such as VXLAN. One year later at the same meeting, MPLS was
still alive and well. It's 2018 now...

The trick is not about knowing which technologies will actually help
your operations and/or business, but rather, knowing which ones won't.
It's a fun game :-)...

Mark.