2014-01-14 20:44 skrev Mark Tinka:
> On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 05:06:33 PM > [email protected]: > >> The devices will likely be ASR9001 for PE and ME2600 for Access. > > I would go for the ME3600X, as that gets you proper IPv4, > IPv6 and MPLS in the Access, along with features. > > The ME2600X is great, but lacks the Layer 3 and MPLS > capabilities (along with a few QoS restrictions, but still > better than any other switches in Cisco's arsenal). > > With the ME3600X, all you need to worry about is resiliency > to your customers. Typically, I'd leave it up to them, > rather than you doing fancy things like MC-LAG, VRRP, e.t.c. > > Cheers, > > Mark. I agree. That was my initial choice but had to abandon it due to pricing. It would simplify the network a lot to have proper L3 in the access device itself. I don't like things that require to sync state and I'm not sure how it would handle a split brain scenario if the link between the two PEs go down. Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
