VLAN's aren't implemented using (R)STP. (R)STP is just used to prevent
layer2 loops where as VLAN's are used to separate traffic at layer 2 into
separate broadcast domains.
VLAN's are layer 2 so you need a flat network to implement them which means
there are scalability issues. Because they are layer 2 it means the traffic
is switched instead of routed which is normally quicker as a switched
network is normally done in hardware (ASICs).
EoIP will create a layer 2 topology over a routed network which means you
can implement a flat vlan network across the public internet if you wanted
however it adds overhead to each packet as the traffic is tunneled which
effects the available bandwidth. It is also slower than VLAN's as it's not
true layer2.
MPLS is designed to switch traffic quickly through the use of a label or
shim instead of routing based on IP address. It offers speed, scalability
and functionality and has built-in support for multicast, QoS, VPN's, many
routing protocols such as BGP and OSPF.
Each have there place but it depends on the application and scale of the
project.
Cheers,
P.
www.skyline-networks.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matt Liotta
Sent: 09 June 2006 21:18
To: WISPA General List
Subject: layer 2 transport (was Re: [WISPA] looking for a device)
John Scrivner wrote:
> Can anyone describe any functional and/or technical differences
> between VLANs and say MPLS or Mikrotik's EoIP? It sounds to me like
> all three are functional equivalents of each other. Please correct me
> if this is an incorrect assumption. I have Googled it so spare me the
> obvious. I want to hear your thoughts.
> Thanks,
> Scriv
>
VLANs are implemented using (R)STP and they were generally described
earlier. (R)STP is a broadcast protocol that allows multiple layer 2
devices to among other things be connected redundantly without causing
loops. Thus, you can create a rather large and complex network where
individual layer 2 networks share infrastructure, but are separated from
each other. This is used by some carriers to sell layer 2 transport,
which is basically a single VLAN that is trunked across the network.
VLANs are not an ideal way to deal with layer 2 transport for several
reasons. First, STP is very slow to deal with link state changes. Worse,
STP networks get slower the larger they are. RSTP fixes some of these
issues with STP, but convergence time is still too slow for most
applications. Next, VLANs must be properly configured across the all
devices that might be involved in the circuits delivery. Failure to
properly configure the VLANs can result in your entire network failing
as the links are saturated with (R)STP broadcasts. Finally, there is a
finite limit on the number of VLANs you can have on any given Ethernet
network.
MPLS can provide layer 2 transport just like VLANs, but without all the
above problems. However, MPLS is not limited to layer 2 transport. MPLS
allows for transport of many protocols from Ethernet to ATM to IP.
Further, MPLS TE allows for enforcement of SLAs in regards to latency,
jitter, and QoS. Most interestingly though, MPLS rides on top of an IP
network allowing all the benefits of a redundant IP network including
sub-second convergence.
-Matt
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/359 - Release Date: 08/06/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.3/360 - Release Date: 09/06/2006
--
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
