Hi Steve, I think you're analogy of MPLS to switching is fairly accurate. One thing I would add is the main difference from common switching and MPLS is how the switching is done. MPLS allows P (provider) devices to switch traffic using paths discovered by PE (provider edge) devices. This allows P routers to forward traffic without knowing the layer 3 destination or performing layer 3 lookups. Also worthy of note is the topic of speed. Initially speed might have been a benefit in MPLS however I believe this is no longer true. Although MPLS allows forwarding without layer 3 lookups, switching mechanisms such as this have been around for quite awhile. In fact Cisco even requires you run CEF in order to enable MPLS. There are no speed benefits from running CEF with or without MPLS thus saying MPLS will make your network faster is not entirely true. Using layer 3 switching mechanisms will improve you're speed and MPLS will allow for the reduction of routes in the core of the network... Regards, -Michael Cohen -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stephen Skinner Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 2:37 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=5732&t=5732 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
