We have found that you can move a considerably more data through weaker routers like the RB2011 when you use MPLS/VPLS and don't have them routing internet traffic. It also drops latency. It also gives you the ability to us Traffic engineering tunnels.
We would recommend it... Just be warned that it will increase your complexity and you will have to have MPLS across all connections between your towers and the CHR. On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Josh Baird via Mikrotik-users < [email protected]> wrote: > We are starting to deploy more and more small 'micro' pops (1-15 customers > typically). Often times, they 'hang' off of our larger (routed) sites and > we just bridge from the larger site to the micropop. > > Some of them are routed individually due to their location on our > network. For these particular sites, I'm thinking of spinning up a CHR in > our datacenter and using MPLS/VPLS (or something) to create 'tunnels' from > the micropops back to the CHR. The CHR will handle customer > authentication, DHCP, firewall, etc for all of these sites. This also > keeps me from having to allocate multiple public IPv4 blocks to each of > these smaller routed sites (I can allocate one block to the CHR). > > The 'routed' micropops currently have a mix of RB2011 and RB450G routers. > Is this a good use case for something like MPLS/VPLS? Would the router(s) > downstream of the CHR need to speak MPLS as well or would it be sufficient > to just 'terminate' everything on the CHR? > > _______________________________________________ > Mikrotik-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users > > -- David Jones NGL Connection 307-288-5491 ext 702
_______________________________________________ Mikrotik-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/mikrotik-users
