nanog mailing list archives
Re: EPC backhaul networks
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 19:09:15 +0100 (CET)
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Glen Kent wrote:
I would like to understand why there is a preference for L3 VPNs over L2 VPNs for the EPC backhaul networks? We can use both layer 2 and layer 3 VPNs for communication between the eNodeB and the MME or S-GW, so why is it that most providers prefer L3 over L2.
Becuase the lessons learnt in the last 30 years or so of networking is that large L2 domains are considered harmful. If you subnet them down in different vlans, it means for every new vlan you need to configure something on the MME/SGW.
It's just easier and safer to break it down into smaller L3 domains that you route between.
-- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike () swm pp se
Current thread:
- Re: EPC backhaul networks, (continued)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Cameron Byrne (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Ping Pan (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Mikael Abrahamsson (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Mikael Abrahamsson (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Cameron Byrne (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Ping Pan (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Joel Jaeggli (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Phil Bedard (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Owen DeLong (Jan 30)
- RE: EPC backhaul networks Frank Bulk (Jan 30)
- Re: EPC backhaul networks Owen DeLong (Jan 30)