Howard,
Correct me if am wrong but, the HDLC advantage over PPP is the MTU size.
PPP supports 1500 while HDLC 4xxx (can't remember the exact number),
this might be helpful in situations where DF bit is set.
Nabil
"Howard
C.
Berkowitz" To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: T-1 Encap Preference
[7:27637]
Sent
by:
nobody@groups
tudy.com
11/28/2001
11:14
PM
Please
respond
to
"Howard
C.
Berkowitz"
> > HDLC is a Cisco-proprietary protocol.
>
>Not to nitpick, but HDLC itself is not proprietary; Cisco's
>implementation is... HDLC was developed by the International
>Organization for Standardization (ISO). It falls under the ISO
>standards ISO 3309 and ISO 4335.
>
>Like others have pointed out, PPP is the way to go when mixing
>vendors, since it is an Internet standard.
>
>There may be one exception, however, but I cannot confirm it 100%...
>I was out at one of my customers a few weeks ago, and they were
>changing ISPs. I asked the new ISP whether we ought to be using PPP
>or HDLC, and he said HDLC. I commented on their use of Cisco
>equipment, and he told me that the head-end router was actually a
>Juniper box.
>
>Now, it seems reasonable to me that the new kid on the block, so to
>speak, would attempt to seemlessly interoperate with the most widely
>used routers, but I cannot say for sure. Can anyone confirm this?
It would be most correct to say Cisco uses an HDLC-framed proprietary
protocol. HDLC itself is really meant to be subsetted. LAP, LAP-B,
LAP-D, and LAP-F are all proper subsets.
Juniper may have Cisco HDLC as an option. I know BSDI UNIX does.
But HDLC has no real advantages over PPP for router-to-router
communications, so it's not something I worry about -- if there's any
question, I use PPP.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27718&t=27637
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
