At 08:42 AM 9/2/2003 +1200, Thomas Salmen wrote:
hmm, cheers
any idea if there is any documentation regarding this? seems to me that with
all these sites these days mucking around with df bits and filtering icmp
that it's a wonder that any link with an odd pmtu works at all. not to
mention qos
At 10:37 PM 8/31/2003 +, Thomas Salmen wrote:
does anyone know if using frame-mode mpls affects the mtu on an interface? i
can't help thinking that sticking in an extra 32-bit header would mean
reducing the amount of user data that could be carried by 32 bits - causing
fragmentation if the
hmm, cheers
any idea if there is any documentation regarding this? seems to me that with
all these sites these days mucking around with df bits and filtering icmp
that it's a wonder that any link with an odd pmtu works at all. not to
mention qos getting all upset with fragmented packets.
thomas
I like the starting point in Stephen Hutnik and Michael Satterlee book (All
in One CCIE.
MPLS and VPN worked great in our lab, with 2500 routers.
Unfortunately, it is impossible to reproduce MPLS Traffic Engineering on
2500. The router crashes.
Hope Helps.
Message Posted at:
Cisco site has a decent set of configuration samples (as usual).
MPLS and VPN architectures (cisco press) is a great starting point and you
can go from there.
hth,
Mark.
-Original Message-
From: Eyabane Patasse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 10:27 AM
To:
I would try the cisco web site first.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk436/tk428/tech_configuration_e
xamples_list.html
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk436/tk428/tech_tech_notes_list
html
Well, I guess just go to the website (cisco, juniper redback...etc) and
do a search on
Cisco site has a decent set of configuration samples (as usual).
MPLS and VPN architectures (cisco press) is a great starting point and you
can go from there.
hth,
Mark.
-Original Message-
From: Eyabane Patasse [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 10:27 AM
To:
I would try the cisco web site first.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk436/tk428/tech_configuration_e
xamples_list.html
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk436/tk428/tech_tech_notes_list
.html
Well, I guess just go to the website (cisco, juniper redback...etc) and
do a search on
Hi Karen,
Would EoMPLS meet your requirement?
Best Regards,
Alaerte
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=72384t=72376
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report
Karen,
We are currently working on rolling out Martini L2 Ethernets over MPLS.
There are two Cisco ways to do Ethernet over MPLS.
The first and most commonly used method uses VC 0x0004 as defined in
draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls. It is used to transport individual
.1q vlans, which if I
Hi Mike,
We are going to implement EoMPLS over two 6509 connected through 155 Mbps
PoS link. Do you have experience concerning CPU/memory utilization?
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=72404t=72376
--
FAQ, list
the first
Cisco Press book to talk about Martini L2 stuff.
-Original Message-
From: alaerte Vidali [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MPLS VLANs... [7:72376]
Hi Mike,
We are going to implement EoMPLS over two 6509
check the blue print on CCO.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=71218t=71132
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to
For the Communication Services Written Exam , general knowledge for MPLS,
MPLS/VPN should be oki I think.
Cisco's MPLS and MPLS/VPN Tech Support page should be enough for the written
part for the MPLS and MPLS VPN questions.
Thanks,
I sucessfully created MPLS VPN on this platform/image, but maybe it is
necessary 2600 family router to test MPLS TE.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=70542t=70221
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription
I tried another version, but occurs the same error message:
R2#sh ver
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) 2500 Software (C2500-JS-L), Experimental Version
12.0(20011017:155337) [rraszuk
-New_reorg_oct17 110]
2#sh flash
System flash directory:
File Length Name/status
1
10, 2003 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: MPLS TE crash the router 2500 [7:70221]
I tried another version, but occurs the same error message:
R2#sh ver
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) 2500 Software (C2500-JS-L), Experimental Version
12.0(20011017:155337) [rraszuk
-New_reorg_oct17
it is strange
i used this command many times and my routers never crashed :)
is this only happening on the 2500 platform?
and could you tell your sh ver
regards
De
- Original Message -
From: alaerte Vidali
To:
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 10:13 PM
Subject: MPLS TE crash the
The version is:
R3#sh vers
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) 2500 Software (C2500-P-L), Experimental Version
12.0(20011017:155337) [rraszuk-
New_reorg_oct17 109]
R3#sh flash
System flash directory:
File Length Name/status
1 8303380 /c2500-p-l.20oct2001
The memory
look up back issues of cisco's IP journal there's a good article on
MPLS..
Steven Aiello wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry for such a newbe question. But what is MPLS? And what is it?
Any one have a link they can point me too? Just trying to learn more.
Thanks,
Steve
At 02:16 PM 3/10/2003 +, Steven Aiello wrote:
Sorry for such a newbe question. But what is MPLS? And what is it?
Any one have a link they can point me too? Just trying to learn more.
I would recommend you start at www.mplsrc.com and possibly surf to the
standards page. Within that page,
Yes, Thanks.
I did a lab and the router did allow configure the same DLCI on two
different interfaces.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=65097t=65093
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
Your router is connected to a port on a frame-relay switch on the provider's
end. That port can handle multiple PVCs. a DLCI is just the FR switch's way
of determining which of those PVC's a frame belongs to and thus how it
should be routed. So from a certain viewpoint, both statements are true.
Multiprotocol Label Switching. Can read up on it at Cisco or I believe,
whatis.com has a little on it, as well.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64899t=64898
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
I found this link to Cisco for MPLS.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/120newft/120
limit/120s/120s5/mpls_te.htm
Bon apetit!
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64901t=64898
--
FAQ, list
Converge Network Digest has a few tutorials on MPLS on their web site. Not
alot of detail but really good overviews for someone new to the technology.
http://www.convergedigest.com/Bandwidth/archive/010910TUTORIAL-rgallaher1.htm
Hope this helps,
Karen
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fqos
_c/qcfbook.pdf
Let me know if you like it :)
Xy Hien Le wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi All,
Can anyone show me a few links to some good QoS, MPLS practice labs?
Thanks in advance.
Xy
Message
Also this one.
http://www.netcraftsmen.net/welcher/
Router Kid wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fqos
_c/qcfbook.pdf
Let me know if you like it :)
Xy Hien Le wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi
Hello,
I think MPLS require CEF because some mechanisms like: Packets are switched
in the interrupt code using the CEF cache (FIB table). It supports
per-packet load balancing (previously only supported by process switching),
per-source/destination load balancing (only supported by CEF
. Jim Guichard is an active participant on the
list so you can drill down about as deep as you want and get pretty good
answers.
HTH,
John
- Original Message -
From: Anne Beatriz
To:
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 6:33 AM
Subject: Re: MPLS and CEF [7:62993]
Hello,
I think MPLS
Off the top of me noodle I think It has to do the FIB built by CEF
and the FIB probably contains the tag info MPLS uses. I'm sure someone
else can elaborate much more eloquently than I though ;)
Dave
Router Kid wrote:
anyone knows why MPLS require CEF to be enable on the cisco routers ?
mpls use sef table to forword lable if you need more information
you can e-mail me in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62997t=62993
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
I have the ip rsvp bandwidth 500 500 on the related interfaces. Is that
what you mean?
Charles @groupstudy.com em 27/01/2003 21:05:18
Favor responder a Charles
Enviado Por: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Assunto:Re: MPLS Traffic Engineering - 2500 router reset
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Assunto:Re: MPLS Traffic Engineering - 2500 router reset [7:61947]
one of the things you have to do is use enable rsvp on all interfaces that
will take part in the tunnel ... rsvp is used to 'reserve bandwidth for
the
tunnel' - the tunnel won't come up unless you do
one of the things you have to do is use enable rsvp on all interfaces that
will take part in the tunnel ... rsvp is used to 'reserve bandwidth for the
tunnel' - the tunnel won't come up unless you do this
I think the command is either 'rsvp bandwidth' or 'rsvp-bandwidth'
wrote in message
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Direct: (321) 309-1410
888.449.5766 (USA) / 888.SOLUNET (Canada)
-Original Message-
From: Paul Jin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 4:51 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS images for 7200? 2500? [7:60284]
Chuck,
It definitely
Chuck,
It definitely is an unsupported image. It is an image that Cisco created
internally for some testing only. Most of people at Cisco
don't even know the image exists.. I know, I even opened a TAC ticket
to locate this image and they told me that it did not exist even though I
specifically
I know you can grab the mpls images for the 25xx series here:
ftp-eng.cisco.com (anonymous)
/rraszuk/specials
c2500-js-l.20oct2001
c2500-p-l.20oct2001
c2500-p-l.tag
Dennis L of course has his site http://home.attbi.com/~blaga/
Can't help you out specific for 72xx sorry..
cheers,
Mark.
neal r wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Thanks to the fellows at http://www.optimumdata.com I'm going to have
a lab with a mix of 72xx and 25xx available for the next week or two for
MPLS playtime with an eye on finishing that portion of my CCIP.
I've wrestled
hey, Mark, thanks for the tip. I read Dennis' pdf, and checked out both the
web sites mentioned.
looks like this software has not been updated in quite a while. obviously it
is unsupported.
Chuck
TANSTAAFL
there ain't no such thing as a free lunch
Vicuna, Mark wrote in message
[EMAIL
not exactly what you want but... the 12.2.12a enterprise plus image
works on the 3620's
have you tried using cisco's feature navigator (www.cisco.com/go/fn) a
colleague mentioned it to me when I was struggling with the new 'software
advisor' I hope that helps! if you do find a working
to be honest.
cheers,
M
-Original Message-
From: The Long and Winding Road
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 04, 2003 10:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS images for 7200? 2500? [7:60284]
hey, Mark, thanks for the tip. I read Dennis' pdf, and checked out both
Currently the 6500/7600 can only function as a PE with an OSM. Assuming
you have one, you would configure the ethernet port your 2500 is connecting
to into a unique vlan, then configure one of the Gig-E ports on the OSM as
your 'upstream' using dot1q encapsulation, and terminate your VRF there.
And as a P router, can it? I do not have a OSM.
John Murphy @groupstudy.com em 03/01/2003
11:24:41
Favor responder a John Murphy
Enviado Por: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Assunto:Re: MPLS VPN [7:60205]
Currently the 6500/7600 can only function as a PE
Mohamad saro wrote:
when I put command MPLS MTU 1512 on both ends of a serial
interface and
try to ping from one side to the other with packet sizes
greater than
1500 and less than or equal 1512 with don't fragment bit set
the packets
are dropped any ideas?
How are you specifying the
ftp to ftp-eng.cisco.com (anonymous login)
cd /rraszuk/specials
here they are:
-rw-r--r-- 1 23115eng 12940544 Feb 15 2002 c2500-js-l.20oct2001
-rw-r--r-- 1 23115eng 8303380 Feb 15 2002 c2500-p-l.20oct2001
-rw-r--r-- 1 23115eng 7973476 Feb 15 2002
Guys,
What is the minimal flash/ram memory needed to run this code on a 26xx.
Rgds,
Umar.
Reinhold Fischer wrote in message
news:200210300723.HAA11457;groupstudy.com...
Michael,
if it is only for lab/learning purpose you can use the 12.0S
images from ftp-eng.cisco.com. They are not
Michael Vasilenko wrote in message
news:200210292058.UAA00599;groupstudy.com...
Hello!
One question - is it possible to run MPLS (edge or LSR) on 26xx?
Any experience? Right IOS?
Sure, it's just flaky. And not surprisingly MPLS is not officially
supported by Cisco on 26xx's, so if you are
Michael,
if it is only for lab/learning purpose you can use the 12.0S
images from ftp-eng.cisco.com. They are not supported by cisco,
but work quite well. Use anonymous login and look under /isp
Note: The cisco2500 image does not have too much MPLS features
built in. No problems with the 2600
I was thinking of using the appropriate sections of the QoS Configuration
Guide and Multiservice Configuration Guide (IOS 12.1) from the Cisco CD/Web.
I figure they need to be read for the lab anyway (that's why I picked IOS
12.1).
I started reading the QoS guide, and it has theory in the
I used IP QOS from Ciscopress ISBN:1578701163
I relied on CCO for MPLS
Jayagiri B Nair wrote in message
news:200210221916.TAA17048;groupstudy.com...
Hello friends,
Please anybody could suggest the best books for mpls and qos topics for
the
RS written exam?
Any news about the new CCIE
The file name is MPLS for the 2500.ZIP and it's in the / rather then
/upload area...
--- Dennis
- Original Message -
From: Desmond
To: Dennis Laganiere
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 5:18 PM
Subject: Re: MPLS for 2500 - almost
Hi Dennis
The file is gone.
Could yo tell me where I
At 06:04 PM 9/30/2002 +, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
I have an even more fundamental question. ;-) Why does MPLS need a routing
protocol at all? Obviously, the forwarding of traffic doesn't use it.
Forwarding is based on the labels. Is it for the label distribution
component? Couldn't that
Peter van Oene wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
At 06:04 PM 9/30/2002 +, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
I have an even more fundamental question. ;-) Why does MPLS need a
routing
protocol at all? Obviously, the forwarding of traffic doesn't use it.
Forwarding
At 03:12 AM 10/1/2002 +, nrf wrote:
I've been involved in Formal International Standards Bodies, where
the Camel was developed as a functional specification for a Mouse.
The market and the world are far faster than the carriers would like
it to be.
Here I must disagree. The
Which is why I believe that any new carrier-style technology that is
directed towards the Internet will achieve unnecessarily slow adoption
by
the carriers. Now don't get me wrong, MPLS will be adopted, the real
question is how quickly. If much of the work on MPLS is done mostly on
one last shot before going to work ( below ):
nrf wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
snip a bit
Here I must disagree. The fact is the traditional carriers basically are
the market, in the sense that they are the ones with money to spend. It
doesn't really
Hi,
The question should be what you want to do with MPLS, so what is the
reason you want to implement MPLS in the first place.
- MPLS VPN's: EIGRP could be used
- Make core BGP free: EIGRP can be used
- MPLS Traffic Engineering: EIGRP can NOT be used, only OSPF/ISIS
For the first 2 you could
From the SP point of view either use OSPF or ISIS for scalability,
standards and QoS features. For example only these two protocols will
allow you to do traffic engineering with MPLS over your backbone.
From the client point side EIGRP is not one of the protocols to be used
between PE-CE.
At 2:52 AM + 9/30/02, nrf wrote:
Chuck's Long Road wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
hey, friends, I'm always interested in learning something I didn't know
before. not claiming to know a whole lot about MPLS, but in terms of
operation, MPLS operates on top
I have an even more fundamental question. ;-) Why does MPLS need a routing
protocol at all? Obviously, the forwarding of traffic doesn't use it.
Forwarding is based on the labels. Is it for the label distribution
component? Couldn't that be done with manual configuration?
Priscilla
nrf wrote:
Robert Edmonds wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
In a large organization, I would recommend OSPF anyway. It's generally
considered to be more scalable the EIGRP.
Well, shyeeet, if you REALLY want scalability in an IGP, then there's only
one answer - ISIS.
Haakon Claassen (hclaasse) wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Perhaps the Multi protocol
Is in regards to the fact that it can support multiple routing contexts
(one per vrf)
That's a pretty weak definition of 'multiprotocol'.
More to the point, even if you're
I got an even more fundamental question - why does MPLS require IP at
all?
At the risk of starting a religious way, it's not called Internet
Protocol
Label Switching, it's Multi-protocol label switching. MPLS has
effectively
become a feature of IP, as opposed to a generalized control-plane
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I have an even more fundamental question. ;-) Why does MPLS need a routing
protocol at all? Obviously, the forwarding of traffic doesn't use it.
Forwarding is based on the labels. Is it for the label
Thank You everyone for the valuable input . This has helped me put the issue
in the correct prospective !!!
Cheers
Jaspreet
_
Consultant
Andrew NZ Inc
Box 50 691, Porirua
Wellington 6230, New Zealand
Phone +64 4 238 0723
Fax
I have an even more fundamental question. ;-) Why does MPLS need a routing
protocol at all?
To determine the potential topologies over which end-to-end, and
alternate (e.g., shared risk groups) paths can be established, and
THEN to which labels can be assigned on a node-by-node basis.
Haakon Claassen (hclaasse) wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Perhaps the Multi protocol
Is in regards to the fact that it can support multiple routing contexts
(one per vrf)
That's a pretty weak definition of 'multiprotocol'.
More to the point, even if you're
nrf wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[snip]
And I think this functionality was sadly lost. Not the transport
functionality, but the path-setup functionality. I think more work needs
to
be done on the ATM side of things to make MPLS more palatable to carriers
At 7:11 PM + 9/30/02, nrf wrote:
Robert Edmonds wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
In a large organization, I would recommend OSPF anyway. It's generally
considered to be more scalable the EIGRP.
Well, shyeeet, if you REALLY want scalability in an IGP, then
Howard C. Berkowitz wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
At 7:11 PM + 9/30/02, nrf wrote:
Robert Edmonds wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
In a large organization, I would recommend OSPF anyway. It's
generally
considered to be
Kent Yu wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
nrf wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[snip]
And I think this functionality was sadly lost. Not the transport
functionality, but the path-setup functionality. I think more work
needs
Howard C. Berkowitz wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
At 7:11 PM + 9/30/02, nrf wrote:
Robert Edmonds wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
In a large organization, I would recommend OSPF anyway. It's
generally
considered to
Creighton CCNP
Senior System Engineer
Motorola
iDEN CNRC Packet Data MPS
-Original Message-
From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:21 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS Vs EIGRP [7:54507]
Howard C. Berkowitz wrote in message
Jelly doughnut? I don't get it - I thought he was talking about the Shiite
population in Iran which dominated news a couple decades ago with the rise
of the Ayatollah Khomeini...
A Berliner, er, jelly doughnut sounds a bit tasty, though... JFK sure
thought so - especially in Germany...
JFK is
I got an even more fundamental question - why does MPLS require IP at
all?
At the risk of starting a religious way, it's not called Internet
Protocol
Label Switching, it's Multi-protocol label switching. MPLS has
effectively
become a feature of IP, as opposed to a generalized
What was the question?
At 08:25 PM 9/30/2002 +, Kohli, Jaspreet wrote:
Thank You everyone for the valuable input . This has helped me put the issue
in the correct prospective !!!
Cheers
Jaspreet
_
Consultant
Andrew NZ Inc
Box 50
I've been involved in Formal International Standards Bodies, where
the Camel was developed as a functional specification for a Mouse.
The market and the world are far faster than the carriers would like
it to be.
Here I must disagree. The fact is the traditional carriers basically are
Howard C. Berkowitz wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I got an even more fundamental question - why does MPLS require IP
at
snip a bit
I've been involved in Formal International Standards Bodies, where
the Camel was developed as a functional specification for
If you can find the e-mail address, go ask Ivan Pepelnjak. If there is
one person in Cisco who knows that answer, it is him.
Theo
Kohli, Jaspreet
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
09/30/2002 09:15 AM
Please respond to Kohli, Jaspreet
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
hey, friends, I'm always interested in learning something I didn't know
before. not claiming to know a whole lot about MPLS, but in terms of
operation, MPLS operates on top of a routing protocol, any routing protocol,
correct? Requires that CEF is enabled, at least in the Cisco world, but any
old
Chuck's Long Road wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
hey, friends, I'm always interested in learning something I didn't know
before. not claiming to know a whole lot about MPLS, but in terms of
operation, MPLS operates on top of a routing protocol, any routing
In a large organization, I would recommend OSPF anyway. It's generally
considered to be more scalable the EIGRP.
nrf wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Chuck's Long Road wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
hey, friends, I'm always
Cisco Systems
De Kleetlaan 6b - Pegasus Park
B-1831 Diegem (Belgium)
-Original Message-
From: Chuck's Long Road [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: maandag 30 september 2002 3:51
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS Vs EIGRP [7:54507]
hey
Diegem (Belgium)
-Original Message-
From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: maandag 30 september 2002 4:53
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS Vs EIGRP [7:54507]
Chuck's Long Road wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
hey, friends, I'm always in
no, there is only one image that can run MPLS on 25xx's and it was not
developed for release, it is used only internally in Cisco.
25xx were not designed for MPLS.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=54266t=54246
--
Depends on what you want. It is my opinion that neither is really that
good. Don't get me wrong, they're OK, but they certainly aren't worthy of
touching Doyle, not by a long shot. The Pepelnjak one talks a lot about
VPN's but makes absolutely no mention of TE. The Alwayn one talks about TE,
to your last post and
tell us the name of the vendor that has these oh-so-wonderful white
papers!
Thanks,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 1:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS Books [7:53255]
Depends on what you want
AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS Books [7:53255]
Depends on what you want. It is my opinion that neither is really that
good. Don't get me wrong, they're OK, but they certainly aren't worthy
of
touching Doyle, not by a long shot. The Pepelnjak one talks a lot about
VPN's
]]
Sent: Tuesday, 17 September 2002 4:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS for 2500 [7:53353]
MPLS'ers,
Assuming you find the IOS that supports MPLS on the 2500
or 2600, is it possible then to set up a little MPLS cloud
with HDLC or PPP links connecting the routers?
Alternatively, we
instead of an IP or IPX frame. MPLS is treated as
just another network layer protocol.
Not sure about HDLC though.
Richard Larkin
-Original Message-
From: Tom Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, 17 September 2002 4:41 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS
Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2002 9:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MPLS for 2500 [7:53353]
If I understand this correctly, cisco routers support this RFC 3032 feature.
Then the next question is, Do any Cisco routers support VoMPLS, where lines
would bring
AFAIK no 2500 images will support MPLS, only the 2600 and above
Francois
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Tim Medley
Sent: Wednesday, 18 September 2002 2:53 p.m.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MPLS for 2500 [7:53353]
So has anyone
it or overload the capacity, they may not bother you for years, can a
rotuer in an IP network do that?
Kent
- Original Message -
From: bbfaye
To:
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 1:21 AM
Subject: Re: mpls-l2 vpn vs. vlan [7:49346]
Kent,
I heard equant guys managing a nice MPLS l3 vpn
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.
In my impression,most switches can not afford to large number of 802.1q vlan
trunk. hundreds of tunk vlan will cause the machine poor performance or
crash.
I suffer it with some intel's switches before.
I heard cisco and other vendor suggest not to use too many vlan trunk in
their
machine. is it
I cannot see any problem using vlan from your access layer up to the
aggregation point, as long as the PE has enough capacity to hold the routes.
If necessary, you can always use several PEs in one location to spread out
your aggregation, you may want to use some lower end routers/switches, kind
Before going down this road, I tend to wonder what drives people this
direction. Exactly what is it about poorly scaling, flat networks that
turn people on? Last I checked, IP did a pretty decent job of providing a
robust means of interconnection between remote sites. To me, its LANE all
At 1:46 PM + 7/23/02, Kent Yu wrote:
I cannot see any problem using vlan from your access layer up to the
aggregation point, as long as the PE has enough capacity to hold the routes.
If necessary, you can always use several PEs in one location to spread out
your aggregation, you may want to
At 1:46 PM + 7/23/02, Peter van Oene wrote:
Before going down this road, I tend to wonder what drives people this
direction. Exactly what is it about poorly scaling, flat networks that
turn people on?
My impression is that it is an unholy alliance of traditional telcos
and traditional
1 - 100 of 261 matches
Mail list logo
