Music to my ears. If anyone has a list of exercises for would-be MPLS addicts, please post the URL.
-- TT "Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote: > >Is there some reason that ATM is necessary for MPLS implementations in low > >end Cisco products? It's been my understanding that VPI/VCI field usage > >for labels in any implementation is generally not used. Every mpls network > >I've worked on used shim headers which makes MPLS l2 agnostic. > > Not as far as I know. Should work even with an extra piece of tape on > an RFC1149 transport. > > > > > > >At 05:24 AM 4/22/2002 -0400, Tom Scott wrote: > >>Howard and scenario builders, > >> > >>Do you have any MPLS labs that don't use ATM? Maybe combining low-end > >>(read "affordable") cisco routers and James Leu's "MPLS for LInux" > >>project? > >> > > >-- TT Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42278&t=42214 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
