Peter, > To me, its LANE all > over again, ie lets take a scalable, robust, intelligent technology and try > and bridge with it. As far as building MANs with Spanning Tree as your > control protocol, I might suggest that it will give you a real headache > from a scaling and provisioning standpoint. You might want to find someone > who worked at Yipes to give you some ideas.
I agree that STP should not be beyond the campus, anything up from better be ip based. I think the original question was about how to separate vpns on lower end devices, either label or vlan tag, ie configuring l2vpn on many access level devices vs. configuring vlans, I guess vlans are easy to configure and manage in this case. For our discussion, IMHO, LANE is too complicated for the subscribers and l3vpn is not easy for the providers, l2vpn is, relatively speaking, simple for both . > > I will say that I am fully behind replacing legacy frame/atm vpn networks > with IP/MPLS networks in order to reduce the number of networks supported > by a single provider. There are definite efficiencies to be gained here. > I would like to know how people are using IP/MPLS network to integrate voice and data? Thanks Kent > > > > > > At 08:12 PM 7/21/2002 +0000, bbfaye wrote: > >we are handling a case of a MAN project now. > >We plan to use mpls-l2 vpn to connect the business subscribers.That means we > >have to place some mpls-enabled machines on the access nodes(expensive...). > >Another choice is using vlan.And the users' vlan are trunked to the > >aggressive > >nodes.I think it's not so good to do this,but not so sure about the > >disadvantage. > >Does anyone have experience or suggestion about using vlan and l2-mpls vpn > in > >the man? > >thanks a lot. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49676&t=49346 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
