Well, this means that you need to have MPLS switching in both case either l2ciruict or l2vpn. What if you want to use pseudo-wire services (like L2TPv3 (Cisco)) when you don't have MPLS environment.
Second if l2vpn is multipoint than what's the usage of VPLS. Is there any significant difference between l2vpn and VPLS. Can't you have pseudo-wire circuit on traditional IP network ( just like cisco L2TPVv3). From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2009 11:08 PM To: Andrew Jimmy Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [j-nsp] l2circuit or l2vpn The main differences are related to the Martini and Kompella method of implementing the technology. For example l2vpn is based on MBGP with RSVP doing the LSP signaling and advertising the labels. This means that the path of the circuit is handled as if it were a virtual circuit because RSVP signals and reserves the bandwidth before traffic is passed. l2circuit is based on LDP which sends hellos end to end but depends on the IGP for resource reservations. The data forwarding is technically the same and you can achieve the same results with either though. Personally, I'm a fan of l2vpn the use of RSVP allows for more tidy configuration and bandwidth reservations. I think l2vpn is a little easier to troubleshoot as well, however YMMV. Keegan From: "Andrew Jimmy" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Date: 01/08/2009 12:54 PM Subject: [j-nsp] l2circuit or l2vpn Sent by: [email protected] _____ What are the major differences between l2cirucit and l2vpn in terms of Juniper JUNOS. Which is best in replacing Cisco L2TPv3 pseudo-wr. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] <https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
