I think this actually is an MPLS VPN, of sorts. It's been fairly hard for me to get the nitty gritty details. As I see it, it's a layer 3 MPLS vpn with OSPF as our 'interface' to their network but I may be wrong about that.
As someone else just mentioned, this service is expensive compared to frame relay. In fact, at the moment it's about twice the monthly cost, but we're quickly growing to a point where the frame network is not going to support our goals. This solution looks pretty slick, I must admit. John >>> Chuck Whose Road is Ever Shorter 7/21/03 1:50:51 PM >>> so, John, whatever happened to the MPLS network they were trying to sell you a while back? what advantage does PRN have vis a vis MPLS such that Quest is no longer trying to convince you to buy it? inquiring minds need to know :-> ""John Neiberger"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Peter van Oene wrote: > > > > At 04:31 PM 7/21/2003 +0000, John Neiberger wrote: > > >Are any of you using Qwest PRN? If so, I have a few questions > > for you: > > > > > >1. How do you like it so far? > > >2. Did you migrate from something else? If so, how did the > > migration go? > > >3. Any 'gotchas' that you learned later that you wish you'd > > learned sooner? > > >4. How does the service compare to what you were using before? > > >5. How many sites do you have? Is this solution scaling well > > for you? > > > > Hey John, > > > > What is PRN? Private routed network? Can't seem to find much > > about it in my > > brief googling. > > > > Oops. Accidentally hit post before adding any content. ;-) > > Yes, it stands for Private Routed Network. It's a very interesting solution. > Our hub sites would participate in OSPF with their network, while our spoke > sites would use static routing. The PRN would have static routes pointing to > our spoke sites and those statics would be redistributed into OSPF. > > The biggest downside to this is that we'd have to contact Qwest each time we > added a new subnet at a branch, but I suppose that just means we'd need to > plan ahead better. > > This solution buys us a few things over our current frame relay network. > Each site has a full pipe into the PRN instead of multiple PVCs sharing a > single link, and we don't have to deal with CIR. From the perspective of our > routers each site is one hop away from any other site. These combination of > these features will allow us to proceed with VoIP throughout our network, > which is not feasible with the current frame relay network. > > John Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=72718&t=72704 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
