Well, no subnet on the destination IP, but there is calculation overhead
with IP transit.

On Friday, February 17, 2017, Jason McKemie <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Destination IP and subnet mask vs. label.
>
> On Friday, February 17, 2017, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote:
>
>> Why do you say “full route”?
>>
>>
>>
>> Seems like the lookup is destination IP à next hop.  Doesn’t seem like
>> rocket science.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Cassidy B. Larson
>> *Sent:* Friday, February 17, 2017 5:02 PM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] MPLS
>>
>>
>>
>> MPLS is supposed to be “faster” than pure IP routing.  It wont have to
>> lookup the full route in the route table.. just match the appropriate label
>> to the label table.
>>
>> If that is true on Mikrotik, I couldn’t tell you.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Feb 17, 2017, at 3:59 PM, Sterling Jacobson <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> We use it for both and then a few more tags for business clients with
>> multiple POPs hanging off our network.
>>
>>
>>
>> Works great.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just want to push the envelope more with my capacity.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie
>> *Sent:* Friday, February 17, 2017 3:36 PM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] MPLS
>>
>>
>>
>> I was debating on whether to just use VPLS for my management traffic and
>> then routing customer traffic as normal, or put both in separate VPLS
>> instances.
>>
>> On Friday, February 17, 2017, Sterling Jacobson <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I’m using it on 6.38 and so far so good.
>>
>>
>>
>> I use it all over and at the core.
>>
>>
>>
>> But I’m still experiencing ‘slow downs’ at the VPLS port where I don’t
>> get 9Gbps anymore, and it appears to be reduced to 5Gbps and 2Gbps for
>> up/down.
>>
>>
>>
>> So I’m thinking of reverting back to straight OSPF and VRRP for my main
>> customer end routing.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Jason McKemie
>> *Sent:* Friday, February 17, 2017 1:27 PM
>> *To:* [email protected]
>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] MPLS
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm starting to utilize MPLS/VPLS at the edge of my network for a
>> specific location, but am wondering if there is any reason to not just use
>> it all the way back to the core.  What are the pros/cons of using MPLS?  I
>> would think that you could save some public IPs if nothing else.
>>
>>
>>
>> Also, has anyone had any issues with MPLS/VPLS on the latest stable
>> RouterOS version (6.38.1)?
>>
>>
>>
>> -Jason
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to