On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:30:54 +0400, Gert Doering <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 07:23:44PM +0400, victor wrote:
I'd very much like to ask the same question my head-office which
distributes this kind of reference material. The only purpose ES20 serve
in their design is to establish VPLS connection between two (four in the
future) core c7604.
Well, yes. If you do VPLS, you need the ES20 (or SIP+SPA).
I think this setup hardly justifies the efforts and money that's been
invested into it. Correct me if I'm wrong but for 2 MLS switches sitting
in the same rack it is too much of an overhead to configure VPLS. A
trunk
link would be considerably simpler and more reliable in this case.
If they sit in the very same rack, just bridge the traffic directly,
and leave MPLS out of the question. Yes.
(But then you are not fully buzzword compliant... bad for marketing)
Even more than that :) because the design was verified, simulated and
approved by a Cisco Systems lab in Raleigh (NC)
Insubordination regarding this matter may result in an unpleasant
conversation with my boss. I should probably insist on ordering ES20 :)))
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
