Hi, L2tpv3 does not work well with the embedded switch-ports on the 870/1800 Routers since they tend to collect the stp/dot-q/.. pakets.
With 1812 and the two "real" Fastethernet ports, Stp and also full-ethernetframe including dot-q tags get transmitted. So I used one of the switch-ports in vlan1 for the IP Transport connection. IOS was c181x-adventerprisek9-mz.124-9.T.bin With this IOS you can use the ip-adress of the LAN interface for the L2tpv3. So you are not bound to have a loopback interface, as seen in later IOses. Probably, the "WAN" "Internet" Port of an 871 may work, but Those devices have an external power-supply. With the 180[123]/1811/1812, you have at least one real FastEthernet Port for the "internet-crossover" Cable; embedded xDSL Modem or second FAS (1811/1812) for the WAN Connection and a crypto-copro for the encryption of that Cable. Hope this help's, Juergen. > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: [email protected] [mailto:cisco-nsp- > [email protected]] Im Auftrag von Aaron > Gesendet: jeudi 30 août 2012 18:32 > An: 'Arie Vayner (avayner)'; [email protected] > Betreff: Re: [c-nsp] l2tpv3 > > Also, can I have a mesh of tunnels between (3) different endpoints, so > 3 different cisco 800's with (2) tunnels per 800 to the other (2) > 800's, such that (3) lan switches hanging off the lan side of the 800's > appear to be all > 3 meshed together AND PASS STP/CDP/VTP, etc ? > > Aaron > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Arie Vayner (avayner) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 10:57 AM > To: Aaron; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [c-nsp] l2tpv3 > > Aaron, > > You should be able to deploy L2TPv3 with the smaller ISR routers... The > 800 series support it (not sure what software feature set is needed...) > > Arie > > -----Original Message----- > From: > [email protected] [mailto:cisco-nsp- > [email protected]] > On Behalf Of Aaron > Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2012 08:27 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [c-nsp] l2tpv3 > > What is the smallest/cheapest cisco router that supports L2TPv3? > > I work at an isp and have small/medium sized businesses that > occasionally want transparent lan connectivity between their sites > (which are connected via FTTH, DSL, Cable Modem). > > Is L2TPv3 tunneling the way to go for something like that ? > > I don't really want to set up all kinds of qinq or mpls l2vpn's in my > core if I can avoid it. > > Also, tunneling endpoints at the customer premise seems that the > dslam/olt/cmts would not have to be wise at all about the tunneling > architecture. > > Lemme know your thoughts/suggestions please > Aaron _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
