My entire Ethernet cellular backhaul architecture is based an a pair of pseudowires per cell tower. We are making money off of pw's.
Aaron > On Jul 9, 2018, at 5:46 PM, Pavel Lunin <[email protected]> wrote: > > We run MPLS all the way into the access, on ASR920's. So pw's are >> end-to-end, and the Provisioning/NOC teams only need to look at the end >> boxes. I found the whole idea of centralized "gateways" in the core to be a >> bit clunky. > > > I have no doubt that you know how to run MPLS in the access smoothly. > However, choosing the right gear for this role has always been a hard job. > Those folks who chose Brocade CES some 5-7 years ago, where are they now? > > The problem is that most real-world networkers have not enough > understanding of MPLS internals, or time, or both to check all those > hardware and software limits and rather look at the vendor's specs in terms > of "supported/not supported". This approach works _relatively_ well in many > cases like choosing a classic switch or a firewall or even an MX/ASR-like > full-feature PE. But for the MPLS in the access you need to tear the guts > out of your vendor, test everything yourself in all possible scenarios and > still be extremely suspicious about every single thing. Moreover a lot of > people have some commercial/political limits in choosing hardware. > > So, while MPLS in the access looks like a good idea, and there are people > who manage to run it well, I know more failure than success stories. > > However p2p pseudo-wire service is a kind of rare thing these days. There >> are [quite a lot of] those poor folks who were never asked whether bridged >> L2 VPN (aka VPLS) is needed in the network, they operate. They have no much >> choice. >> >> >> This is a number I'd like to, someday, actually qualify. When VPLS was the >> buzzword in 2009, everyone was jumping on to it. I'd like to know how many >> of those have continued with it, moved over to EVPN, moved to l3vpn, moved >> to plain-old Internet or moved to LDP-based p2p and p2mp solutions. > > Good question, indeed. In my opinion there are still a lot of folks out > there who build DC networks with vPC, FEX, VirtualChassis, Fusion etc, > which is finally the old good VLANs in a vendor packaged black magic box. > Sooner or later those VLANs need to go across multiple sites. It's nearly > improbable that having such a design, you'll mange to build a > EVPN-VXLAN-hipster-buzz-based DCI. So VPLS is still their best friend. I've > seen some of them who understand that it's evil, and some who believe that > it's OK, both had no choice. > > However my original point was rather about pseudo-wires than VPLS. I mean, > I don't see a lot of pseudo-wires in the wild. Mostly because PW is a kind > of hard to sell. Customers can be of two types: those who love Metro > Ethernet and those who don't. It's true for real customers, whose > requirements are amplified by the sales people, and internal infrastructure > folks. > > Those who love L2 because "it's better and easier" usually don't know what > a pseudowire is. And they just don't care. "Like a switch" is what they are > looking for. > > Those who avoid metro-ethernet just don't need pseudowires, certainly > automesh Kompella-style. L3VPN works well for them, or they buy L1 between > their routers, or go EVPN. > > A pseudo-wire is a kind of side application in my experience, even though > technically it's simple and powerful. Not that it doesn't exist as a > commercial service, but mostly used for internal infrastructure needs on an > occasional basis. > > So I tend to think, that if your business can make money out of > pseudo-wires, it's not about your network design, you are just lucky ;) > > > -- > Pavel > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
