Check brkdct-3060 from cisco live... It should give you some direction. Arie
On Thu, Apr 21, 2016, 01:27 Peter Rathlev <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2016-04-19 at 08:12 +0000, Nick Cutting wrote: > > If you use a L2 tunneling protocol over a L3 DCI - does this mitigate > > all the L2 risks of a data centre interconnect? > > Not as such. The tunnelled packets have a TTL header and loops in the > core are thus less of a problem, but L2 loops through the tunnel can > still persist. > > If you have for example a set of VSS switches in both ends you can > avoid loops altogether, but that goes for both mechanisms. And not > everyone is equally happy about VSS/stacking/IRF and their ilk. > > > i.e. Would using encapsulation of the L2 frames be much better than > > for example, running 3 Vlans over the link, using one for routing and > > 2 for spanned vlans? > > I would personally prefer using the 3 VLANs over a trunk. A tunnelling > mechanism introduces complexity that may outweigh the benefits. > > One benefit is the ability to re-route on link down fast enough that > things like STP will not notice. You will see higher latency as long as > the traffic is re-routed but no topology changes in STP. > > We use connections of both types, L2 with VLANs and L3 tunnelled via > EoMPLS. We use the L3 tunnelled connections where the distance between > the DCs makes it difficult and/or expensive to have a direct L2 > connection. We haven't really seen any problems with these tunnels. > Their ability to survive connectivity problems via re-route has been > very nice for us. > > -- > Peter > > _______________________________________________ > 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/
