RE: Isn't MPLS basically just ATM PNNI, but for layer 3? [7:5766]
Sorry for the typo the rfc is 3036 you can follow this link : http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3036.txt?number=3036 >From pass experience i think Cisco prefers LDP when deploying a VPN network and RSVP-TE when doing traffic engineering -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stephen Skinner Sent: May 24, 2001 1:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Isn't MPLS basically just ATM PNNI, but for layer 3? [7:5758] guys, thanks for your imput . yes i was loosely discribing MPLS ...it does have all the functions you state... and more , i must be mistaken about the RVSP because i seem to remeber reading somewhere that cisco is favoring RSVPand that there LDP is based on this but hey i must be mistaken . also the RFC you list does not come up as valid ont the ITEF...please can you re-send this many thanks steve >From: "Marc-Andre Giroux" >Reply-To: "Marc-Andre Giroux" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Isn't MPLS basically just ATM PNNI, but for layer 3? [7:5723] >Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:56:43 -0400 > >Steve, > MPLS is alot more then just ATM PNNI at layer 3. Your statement is >semi true when talking about MPLS VPN's the concept does come from ATM but >there is so much more you can do with it go read on traffic engineering, >the >fish bowl effect, valued added services (VPNs) and the network protection. > > As for your other statement saying that cisco uses RSVP and everyone >else doesn't. This also is wrong. Cisco uses TDP wich is a label >distribution protocol that is proprietary but they also support the >standard >LDP (RFC 3630) that Juniper and Everyone else are supporting. Juniper >personnaly doesn't have as much support for LDP then RSVP-TE (rsvp has >existed for a couple of years its the TE extensions that are used in >Traffic >engineering). But when you start talking about this be sure to know what >you >are talking about. BTW you can't use LDP or TDP to do MPLS >traffic-Engineering ( and this is the killer app of MPLS). > > I hope this clarifies a few things, I also hope you don't take this >the wrong way but go read on the juniper site about RSVP-TE it will clarify >alot of things for you. Hope this was helpfull and if you have any >questions >don't be shy. > > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >Stephen Skinner >Sent: May 24, 2001 3:37 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Isn't MPLS basically just ATM PNNI, but for layer 3? >[7:5703] > > >hi, > >i to have been reading alot and working with MPLS. > >i personally liken it to Switching more than routing >...i know it uses BGP and also uses static routes,but essentially it just >switches packets over pre-defined paths from device to device ... > >I also see a future for this simply in the Telco enviroment everyone >(cisco Juni and foundry are supporting it ...albeit in different >forms..cisc > >is using RSVP and everyone else isn`t) and the speed increases seem to be >worth it > > >but as ever only my workload and time will tell. > >steve > > > >From: "nrf" > >Reply-To: "nrf" > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Isn't MPLS basically just ATM PNNI, but for layer 3? [7:5660] > >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 21:18:21 -0400 > > > >I would like to hear some opinions on MPLS. I have been reading about >it, > >and, pardon me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like just a reinvention >of > >ATM PNNI. > > > >I would be very interested in hearing some comments on the future of >MPLS. > >Particularly since ATM PNNI seemed to have gotten nowhere with the telcos > >(and I still don't completely understand why not), then why is MPLS going > >to > >do any better (or is it)? > > > >I would be particularly interested in hearing Howard Berkowitz's opinion >on > >the future of MPLS. > > > >Thanx > >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >_ >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __
RE: Any good Hyper Terminal program and telnet server software [7:5760]
Personally I like either secure CRT or Procomm -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: May 24, 2001 11:30 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Any good Hyper Terminal program and telnet server software [7:5750] i use and dig Tera Term Pro. http://www.webattack.com/get/teraterm.shtml roger -Original Message- From: Vincent Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 07:57 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Any good Hyper Terminal program and telnet server software [7:5740] Hi; I am using windows me, which I experience problem while using reverse telenet. I am able to perfrom reverse telnet to other router, but can get out the session. no matter what I try. I am uisng windows 2000 as telnet server, unforunately, it just allowed one user to telnet into the server. Any freeware available in the market. TIA Vincent FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=5760&t=5760 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Isn't MPLS basically just ATM PNNI, but for layer 3? [7:5723]
Steve, MPLS is alot more then just ATM PNNI at layer 3. Your statement is semi true when talking about MPLS VPN's the concept does come from ATM but there is so much more you can do with it go read on traffic engineering, the fish bowl effect, valued added services (VPNs) and the network protection. As for your other statement saying that cisco uses RSVP and everyone else doesn't. This also is wrong. Cisco uses TDP wich is a label distribution protocol that is proprietary but they also support the standard LDP (RFC 3630) that Juniper and Everyone else are supporting. Juniper personnaly doesn't have as much support for LDP then RSVP-TE (rsvp has existed for a couple of years its the TE extensions that are used in Traffic engineering). But when you start talking about this be sure to know what you are talking about. BTW you can't use LDP or TDP to do MPLS traffic-Engineering ( and this is the killer app of MPLS). I hope this clarifies a few things, I also hope you don't take this the wrong way but go read on the juniper site about RSVP-TE it will clarify alot of things for you. Hope this was helpfull and if you have any questions don't be shy. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stephen Skinner Sent: May 24, 2001 3:37 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Isn't MPLS basically just ATM PNNI, but for layer 3? [7:5703] hi, i to have been reading alot and working with MPLS. i personally liken it to Switching more than routing ...i know it uses BGP and also uses static routes,but essentially it just switches packets over pre-defined paths from device to device ... I also see a future for this simply in the Telco enviroment everyone (cisco Juni and foundry are supporting it ...albeit in different forms..cisc is using RSVP and everyone else isn`t) and the speed increases seem to be worth it but as ever only my workload and time will tell. steve >From: "nrf" >Reply-To: "nrf" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Isn't MPLS basically just ATM PNNI, but for layer 3? [7:5660] >Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 21:18:21 -0400 > >I would like to hear some opinions on MPLS. I have been reading about it, >and, pardon me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me like just a reinvention of >ATM PNNI. > >I would be very interested in hearing some comments on the future of MPLS. >Particularly since ATM PNNI seemed to have gotten nowhere with the telcos >(and I still don't completely understand why not), then why is MPLS going >to >do any better (or is it)? > >I would be particularly interested in hearing Howard Berkowitz's opinion on >the future of MPLS. > >Thanx >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=5723&t=5723 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BGP communities [7:4984]
I am worndering what is the average amount of communities used by service providers and Tier 1 ISPs in there BGP table. If anyone has any idea please respond. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4984&t=4984 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: SUP2/PFC2 and MSFC2 6500/7600 OSR [7:4762]
Don't bother SUP2 will not support mpls they will release a sup3 around November wait till that comes out -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of dre Sent: May 16, 2001 6:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: SUP2/PFC2 and MSFC2 6500/7600 OSR [7:4762] Is SUP2+MSFC2 worth upgrading to from SUP1A+MSFC1? Anyone had this in place for awhile or comments on the architecture? -dre FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4832&t=4762 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MPLS [7:4597]
Does anyone on this list have a indept knowledge of mpls? If you have knowledge on MPLS-VPN , VPN-ipv4 , ospf TE, colors, ospf opaque , rsvp te , diffserv , Fastreroute & autobandwith and are seeking to debate and share information on these email me. I am trying to form a MPLS alias. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4597&t=4597 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
how FRR setups its second lsp [7:4559]
Like Juniper, Cisco relies on global repair and local repair to assure Link Protection. The global repair is solely based on a RSVP PathErr message going back to the ingress router (with error code of "Notify" and an error value of "Notification of local repair"). Once received, the ingress takes appropriate actions to create a new LSP. For local protection, Cisco uses a different mechanism then Juniper. This mechanism is described in: draft-swallow-rsvp-bypass-label-01 What is called detour in Juniper terminology is here called a bypass tunnel. The main difference between bypass tunnel and detour is that the bypass tunnels are not associated with any LSP. Bypass tunnel are associated and created to bypass a link that may fail. Every LSP that is using a particular link between two routers may use the bypass tunnel created for that given link. This, as the draft mention, improves the scalability of the mechanism since every LSP does not have to establish its own bypass tunnels. Since many LSP may use the same bypass tunnel, it is important to have a means for the merge node to know to which LSP a particular packet is belonging to. To solve this, the label associated with the bypass tunnels is stacked on top of the original label. The stacked label is removed by the penultimate hop of the bypass tunnel so that the merge node only sees the label it was expecting to receive before the failure occurred. > If the node of local repair, R2, and merge node, R3, were not directly connected to each other (another router between the two), R2 would not know which label it should use to communicate with R3 since labels are only significant for a given link. To solve that, the draft uses the label record option of the ROUTE_RECORD object. With that option, upstream nodes could learn about downstream labels not directly connected to the same link. Label space is also a concern. Let suppose that R3 has a per interface label space. At the creation or the primary LSP, R3 binds a label based on the interface the LSP is coming from. But, if the one link fails and the bypass tunnel becomes active the same label will then arrived by another interface. Since R3 has a per interface label space, it will not be able to recognize it as a valid label or worst, the packet will be sent through the wrong LSP. The draft is unclear about how this should be solved. This is my first question the second is according to cisco the bypass tunnel is standby statis the problem I can't understand is RSVP uses the local IGP to setup the LSP. OSPF does not have the capabilities to see 2 paths it can only see its next hop. Did they modify ospf to recompute a route while blocking R3 from being the next hop? Or is the 2nd tunnel setup another way? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4559&t=4559 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Juniper technical question [7:4398]
the run monitor command will let me see the number of packets sent thru the interfaes but I am trying to debug the icmp packets. As for the show command thank you -Original Message- From: Mohammad Tariq [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: May 14, 2001 8:19 AM To: Marc-Andre Giroux; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Juniper technical question [7:4398] Use show command in juniper which is equivalent to show run and u can use the monitor command in junos to monitor the ICMP packet. Thanks and warm regards. Muhammad Tariq -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Marc-Andre Giroux Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 5:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Juniper technical question [7:4398] 2 questions the first is what is the equivalent of a "show run" in the Junos world and the second I am trying to turn on ICMP debugging in cisco it would be " debug packet icmp" does anyone know how to do this in junos? FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4401&t=4398 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Juniper technical question [7:4398]
2 questions the first is what is the equivalent of a "show run" in the Junos world and the second I am trying to turn on ICMP debugging in cisco it would be " debug packet icmp" does anyone know how to do this in junos? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4398&t=4398 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
