So bridging the VPLS interfaces was the bottleneck?
On 11/20/2019 3:09 PM, Sterling Jacobson wrote:
Well put.
Capacity/speed is an issue with me, so I think I introduced some
possible bottlenecks above 4.5Gbps using MPLS/VPLS in my own network
which is Mikrotik.
VPLS endpoints I don’t think were/are hardware offloaded, so required
some great CPU capacity at the edge and core for large transport.
I also think I had MTU issues with so many layers of “layer2” stuff
going on inside and outside of MPLS tunnels, native interfaces, VPLS
endpoints, bridges and VRRP interfaces along with VLAN at some endpoints.
However, with the right equipment (not Mikrotik) MPLS is fully capable
and large networks use them to diversely traverse redundant paths back
to a central core.
My problem also was geo-diverse BGP cores to different providers as
stated below.
I was running EVERYTHING on a Mikrotik 1072 CCR, lol!
It still drives me crazy hunting down issues where I still have
MPLS/OSPF/BGP/VRRP/VLAN on one device across multiple interfaces, lol!
*From:* AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of * Dennis Burgess via AF
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 20, 2019 12:56 PM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
*Cc:* Dennis Burgess <[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] MPLS
You can, its up to you.
*Is routing faster on MikroTik by using MPLS/VPLS?* No
*Do you gain extra capacity by reducing the router load per packet by
using MPLS? * Yes, think looking at 4-bytes of data vs 40. Is it 10
fold increase, no but you get the point.
*What is the big deal about MPLS without VPLS? *Just that it does get
you a bit of extra capacity. Bout it.
*Why does everyone want to run VPLS? * VPLS gets you the IP and subnet
savings. You do need to design your core network correctly to handle
this. If you have a single core router and all of your tunnels go to
that, then yes if it goes down yes your tunnels are down, but may of
our customers have to have redundancy, so multiple edges, connected to
multiple cores, connected to multiple VPLS termination boxes,
connected to multiple PPPoE servers. Etc. The core is VERY robust,
but the general network is not. This also does not work very well if
your have multiple geographically diverse BGP feeds, i.e. everything
goes back to the datacenter and that’s where it is, great, but
otherwise, it gets to the point that it not worth the effort.
*L2VPNs? *Weill there are a few customers that prefer them, but in all
honestly there is better, more secure, and faster protocols out
there. Keep in mind that L2VPNs are fine if all of the customers are
on your network, but they seldom are, so you will need a plan for
those guys as well. My questions is why do you build your network to
deliver something that people don’t want, a layer 2 network
connection. If you are delivering Pipes then sure, but you have to
have the capacity and availability to do so. Most Wisps, not all,
don’t have this figured out. 99% of the time, they can make more
money by providing a managed L3 solution than L2 anyways.
**
*LTI-Full_175px*
*Dennis Burgess, Mikrotik Certified Trainer
MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE, MTCSE, HE IPv6 Sage, Cambium ePMP
Certified *
Author of "Learn RouterOS- Second Edition”
*Link Technologies, Inc*-- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services
*Office*: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net
<http://www.linktechs.net/>
Create Wireless Coverage’s with www.towercoverage.com
*From:* AF <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
*On Behalf Of *Adam Moffett
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 20, 2019 1:17 PM
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] MPLS
So do you tunnel everything back to the core and then do "router on a
stick" ?
On 11/20/2019 2:14 PM, Gino A. Villarini wrote:
Yeap VPLS is where is at…
VPLS tunnels to the towers, CORE routing + L2VPN to customers(
Enterprise, Wholesale)
*Gino**Villarini **
*Founder/President
@gvillarini
t: 787.273.4143 Ext. 204
m:
aeronet-logo <http://www.aeronetpr.com/>
inc500 <https://www.inc.com/profile/aeronet>
fb-logo <https://www.facebook.com/aeronetpr/>
insta-logo <https://www.instagram.com/aeronetpr/?hl=en>
in-logo <https://www.linkedin.com/company/aeronet-broadband-corp>
tw-logo
<https://twitter.com/AeroNetPR?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor>
yt-logo <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCr2Q9WBrAYVm3Fn970Jd6VA>
www.aeronetpr.com <http://www.aeronetpr.com> | Metro Office Park
#18 Suite 304 Guaynabo, PR 00968
*From: *AF <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]> on behalf of Josh Baird
<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
*Reply-To: *AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Date: *Wednesday, November 20, 2019 at 3:09 PM
*To: *AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] MPLS
It seems like lots of people in the WISP-world are running MPLS
just to use VPLS. Reasons for doing this are typically to achieve
better IPv4 utilization (not having to route a block of IP's to
each POP and maybe wasting IPv4, etc).
Another common use-case is providing L2VPN services for customers
(connecting multiple locations together, etc).
On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 2:03 PM Adam Moffett <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I think I don't fully understand what the advantages are of MPLS.
I mean I've been reading the white-papers and such, and I see
it brings some features to the table, but when are we going to
use them?
Routing speed:
* MPLS can make forwarding decisions faster. When they made
this in the 1990's I'm sure that was a big deal, but I'm
doubting whether there is really measurably better latency
on modern hardware. Is there?
Traffic Engineering:
* It can do redundancy, but it seems to rely on the routing
protocol (eg OSPF) to know which paths are up. I don't
understand what that buys us.
* It can do load sharing on unequal paths. Admittedly that's
very hard to do with L3 routing protocols, and that would
have been extremely useful at one point in time. But how
often does that happen now that we're in a world of
gigabit and 10gigabit connections?
L2 tunneling
* It can transport L2 traffic over an L3 network. It does it
with less overhead (8 bytes) than any other method I can
think of. I don't really see a downside to this.
So are people running MPLS just to get VPLS tunnels, or do you
find that the other tools in the MPLS toolbox matter in
today's world?
--
AF mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
--
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
