Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: MLPPP over MPLS
From: Rodney Dunn <rodunn () cisco com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 08:56:00 -0500



For more specific discussion we can move it over to cisco-nsp
but here is a general document on it.

http://cco/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_guide09186a00801f26c8.html#wp1045653

Rodney


On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 02:00:01PM -0600, Hyunseog Ryu wrote:

Overall, MLPPP may work fine with MPLS as long as you have single 
virtual circuit from each physical circuit.
Such as T1 channel from Channelized DS3...
But you have to use sub-interface (logical interface) other than 
sub-channel from channeliezed circuit,
you may have some problem.
If you want to use QoS with MLPPP, some cases you may have to disable 
CEF because of side effects.

Overall, what I was recommended by Cisco source, is, if possible, to use 
MLFR instead of MLPPP for MPLS integration.

If you need more information, you can contact your local Cisco System 
Engineer, and he/she will give more information to you.

Hyun


Bill Stewart wrote:
I've also heard a variety of comments about difficulties in getting
Cisco MLPPP working in MPLS environments, mostly in the past year when
our product development people weren't buried in more serious problems
(:--)  I've got the vague impression that it was more buggy for N>2
than N=2.  There are a number of ways to bond NxT1 together, including
MLFR and IMA, and we've generally used IMA for ATM and MPLS services
and CEF for Internet.  IMA has the annoyance of extra ATM overhead,
but doesn't have problems with load-balancing or out-of-order
delivery, and we've used it long enough to be good at dealing with its
other problems.




  


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]