Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

From: John Curran <jcurran () istaff org>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 06:11:57 -0500

At 10:32 AM -0800 1/30/06, Andrew Staples wrote:
As we roll out a new network, on one of our links it is remarkably cheaper
to run a T1 ptp vs. MPLS (running 66% data, 33% voice).  Based on comments
received from this list (much thanks,  you know who you are) MPLS
satisfaction seems to be determined by backbone noc competence, not the
technology itself.  So back to price....if I consider layer1 issues to be
equal in either scenario, and aggregation/meshing/hardware is not a real
concern, it seems to me that a correctly configured, directly connected pipe
would work as well as mpls, with the benefit of local control of my routers
and owning any incompetence.

As long as you're referring to PTP with the voice packetized in some manner
(so as to effectively achieve dynamic bandwidth allocation which you can get
with multiple LSP's), then your tradeoff summary is on target.  If you are
looking at PTP TDM solution with fixed allocation, the PTP alternative wastes
any idle voice bandwidth which would otherwise be available for data.


  By Date           By Thread  

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