RE: IPLS & ARP Mediation

Ali,
As I tried to indicate in my  earlier postings, I do NOT regard ARP
Mediation and IPLS as the "ultimate" solution. None-the-less, they provide
well defined features that are scoped, point solutions to particular
customer's problems. And so I believe that we need them documented.
Having two more tools in the toolbox does not invalidate the need for other
solutions with better properties. I have NOT asked for interoperability
between IPLS and VPLS. I suspect IP routing resolves the market requirements
in that area anyway.

Bellsouth already provides  multiple instances of a variety of different
data services within the constraints of different jurisdictions. Application
of a particular protocol in one context does not mean that it is
automatically viable everywhere. Most service providers design a service
considering protocol  constraints, but also considering a variety of other
non-technical factors eg. cost, regulatory treatment, incumbent equipment
capabilities etc. For operational simplicity we prefer a single solution to
a single problem, but our network infrastructure must support solutions to
multiple problems for multiple customers, i.e. we are inherently in a
multiservice environment.

I guess I'm just not sure which of my problems you are suggesting vpls as
the solution to... 8^}

Steven Wright



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ali Sajassi [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 4:56 PM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Draft charter for L2VPN - IPLS & ARP Mediation
>
>
>
> >I'd like to see the work in this area - IPLS & ARP Mediation
> -progressed and
> >documented in a published RFC. They are not the most widely
> deployed cases,
> >but they do exist and  have real network applications.
>
> Steven,
>
> Does Bell South plan to offer VPLS ? If it plans to offer it,
> then there
> should be no need for IPLS because VPLS can be considered as
> a super-set
> since it covers both switches and routers as CEs and it
> supports both IP
> and non-IP traffic. Also inter-operability between IPLS and
> VPLS is another
> thing to consider if you plan to offer both !! However, if
> Bell South plans
> to offer IPLS in lieu of VPLS and assumes that all the
> end-points for a
> transparent LAN service are IPs, then that's a different story.
>
> -Ali
>
>