Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 2008/10/21 Dan Armstrong : > So say I have an SVI on a PE switch which in turn has 2 layer2 links back to > 2 core boxes, the core boxes protected again by a 3rd layer2 link. > > MST will protect me and make sure I always have link to the PE routers

Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

So say I have an SVI on a PE switch which in turn has 2 layer2 links back to 2 core boxes, the core boxes protected again by a 3rd layer2 link. MST will protect me and make sure I always have link to the PE routers & core routers. What's wrong with using that SVI address in your PE router as

Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Dan Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We have a fairly similar design for our Metro Ethernet network. > > Our primary method of protection is STP(MST). I've been thinking about > this, and I can't come up with a reason why we even really need an IGP down > to

Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

We have a fairly similar design for our Metro Ethernet network. Our primary method of protection is STP(MST). I've been thinking about this, and I can't come up with a reason why we even really need an IGP down to the edge PE devices? Since it's all layer2 - the core switch/routers see all

Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Adam Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, the switches aren't important here, so if you plan to do ipv6 in the > future and aren't a huge ospf fan, > have a look at isis now and switch if you like it. It's definitely a lot > easier to manage and troubles

Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

Nathan wrote: On Tue, Oct 21, 2008, Adam Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > Nathan wrote: >> - Is running OSPF on a switch at all useful when the switch is >> connecting routers that are running MPLS, MP-BGP, and OSPF? Can it >> provide faster detection of link los

Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008, Adam Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nathan wrote: >> - Is running OSPF on a switch at all useful when the switch is >> connecting routers that are running MPLS, MP-BGP, and OSPF? Can it >> provide faster detection of link loss? > > The routers can see each other direct

Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

Adam Armstrong wrote: Nathan wrote: Hi again, Since Marko says my question wasn't clear I'll try to make it better :-) - Is running OSPF on a switch at all useful when the switch is connecting routers that are running MPLS, MP-BGP, and OSPF? Can it provide faster detection of link loss? The

Re: [c-nsp] question about service provider network design

Hi again, Since Marko says my question wasn't clear I'll try to make it better :-) - Is running OSPF on a switch at all useful when the switch is connecting routers that are running MPLS, MP-BGP, and OSPF? Can it provide faster detection of link loss? - In a campus scenario, Cisco recommends not

[c-nsp] question about service provider network design

Hi, I'm re-designing a service provider MPLS network, and I'd appreciate some macro-level input. I have two major sites connected by two gigabit WAN lines. I have or will have about a dozen Cisco switches (3508, 2960, 3548, 3550...), half a dozen C7206s for customer termination, four J4350s for e