Re: [c-nsp] Best Practices for Transporting Layer-2 Services
Mark Tinka via cisco-nsp <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.nsp.cisco |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 1/14/23 04:40, Tom Hill via cisco-nsp wrote: > > The normal answer in Cisco land, even today, is to use Martini-draft > P2P pseudowires (either tag or port-based MPLS interconnects) which > will use tLDP for establishment, and should serve you very well > (especially at a port-based level) for a P2P service. In theory tLDP > could run in concert with SR-MPLS, but you might need to think > carefully about label allocation, or... [read on] > > ... use BGP EVPN, and pay very careful attention to the port security > options (e.g. bpduguard, BUM rate-limits) as well as the ARP/ND > sponging/proxy facilities therein. For multipoint L2VPN, this should > be replacing VPLS now. > > Realistically though, protection from storms is hardware dependent, > and making sure that the config is correct is only half of the battle. > I would consider not building L2VPNs for third parties where you don't > control the CE, realistically. Do they really need L2? Tend to agree. We use Martini pw's in our network too. We have stayed away from VPLS and EVPN, as we find out the most customers can accomplish complex p2mp or mp2mp via IP instead of Ethernet. Mark. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/