I think so.
*From:* AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of * Adam Moffett
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 20, 2019 1:22 PM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] MPLS
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]>
<mailto:[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Dennis Burgess via AF
*Sent:* Wednesday, November 20, 2019 12:56 PM
*To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Cc:* Dennis Burgess <[email protected]>
<mailto:[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
