Be aware that MPLS support in 3750ME is a mess, with lots of limitations, unsolved issues and broken promises. 3750 is a good L3 switch in the Ethernet+IP arena, and just that.
On the other hand, ME6500 is a very good MPLS box. Besides doesn't supporting VPLS (can be a member of an H-VPLS architeture, but doesn't do VPLS) and limitations with EoMPLS requiring routerport instead of switchport that can be designed around, it's simply a lot of routes, labels, ACLs that can be handled with very little effort. Good product, indeed. Rubens On 9/17/07, Justin Shore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From reading the data sheet I think you're right. > > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/ps6580/products_data_sheet0900aecd8034fef3.html > > I don't see any mention of MPLS. I was thinking that most of the MEs > had at least basic MPLS features on the uplinks across all models. I > was actually thinking about ordering a couple. Good thing this Chris > posed his question. > > Thanks for the info > Justin > > > Munroe, James (DSS/MAS) wrote: > > The Cisco ME-3400 series do not support MPLS (RFC 2547 VPNs, EoMPLS, VPLS, > > TE, etc...). The ME-3400 only supports Multi-VRF CE (aka VRF-Lite). They > > do not support LDP for label exchange, and from what I've been told by the > > PLM they never will. 12.2.40SE adds Multicast VRF (mVRF) lite support and > > SSM if you're interested. This support was also added to the 3750ME. > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
