MPLS VPN, TE and QoS, If all you need in one BOX than better you go for Juniper M Series. Juniper M10i or M120/320.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Saku Ytti Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2008 1:41 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS PE Routers for a Mobile Carrier? On (2008-08-02 20:20 +0000), Felix Nkansah wrote: > I am working on an MPLS proposal for a mobile carrier (with 2mil+ > customers). > > I need to decide on what routers to use as PE and P for their backhaul > between 5 sites. > > I am torn between proposing the Cisco ASR 1000 OR the Cisco 7600 series as > PE/P. > > Please let me know what your expert opinion is on this matter. They require > MPLS VPN, TE, and QoS. You should find out very carefully if or not you can live with LAN card limitations. Without knowing specific of your QoS requirements, it's very likely that you are terminating customers to subinterfaces, effectively requiring HQoS which LAN cards do not do. Other limitations that pop in my mind are, no vlan local significance, no IPv6/uRPF (and chassis wide strict or loose in IPv4), no IPv6 CoPP, no TOS byte transparency, either you lose up-to /128 lookup or L4 lookups in IPv6. If you find out that you can't live with LAN cards, the main attraction of 7600/6500 goes away and you have much more options to choose from. ASR1k, MX, M, GSR, CRS. But if you are aware of all the catches with LAN interfaces and can live/workaround them, it's very good value to your money. However, in my book they suite much better LSR/P role than LER/PE role. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ 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/
