RE: Seeking Advice: L2TPv3 vs. Martini Draft MPLS

["Mike Bernico" <mbernico () illinois net>]

Thanks for your advice David.  Your point is very well received.  

One of the design requirements for our VPN solution will be the ability
to allow customers to use non-IP protocols.  I don't think RFC2547bis
will work for this.  However if we do go the MPLS route then RFC2547bis
will be available as a product as well as Layer 2 VPNs.  That's
definitely a benefit.  


-----Original Message-----
From: David Bigge [mailto:david.bigge () giftofsite com] 
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 10:56 AM
To: Mike Bernico; nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: Seeking Advice: L2TPv3 vs. Martini Draft MPLS

Mike,

An unsupported standard might as well not be a standard.  I would lean
towards the most openly supported standard- MPLS.  Along with not
letting
one vendor bend you over the barrel, this openess also flushes out any
problems for a more stable long-term network.

You don't talk about 2547bis VPNs.  Are you considering that also?

We use a competitor of Cisco's equipment so I am biased.

My 2 cent.

David

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Bernico" <mbernico () illinois net>
To: <nanog () merit edu>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2003 10:13 AM
Subject: Seeking Advice: L2TPv3 vs. Martini Draft MPLS


> All,
>
> I'm currently comparing these two technologies in an effort to offer a
> Layer 2 VPN service on our backbone.  Our network is currently not
MPLS
> enabled. Below is what I perceive as the pros and cons of each
> technology.  If anyone has thoughts on or experience with either one
of
> these protocols I'd like to hear your opinion.
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> Martini VPN
>
> Pro
> ----
> Supports MPLS TE for each VPN, making it more PVCish
> Enabling MPLS would open up the "MPLS tool box" for other services
like
> L3 VPNs and TE
>
>
> Con
> ---
> Enabling MPLS is a huge change
> Changing the forwarding paradigm in the network exposes us to new and
> interesting bugs and stability issues
>
>
>
> L2TPv3 VPN
>
> Pro
> ---
> Doesn't require MPLS/Much smaller change
>
>
> Con
> ----
> Although standard, only supported by Cisco currently (I think)
> Requires special tunneling card in GSR routers.