OK - That makes sense. For scaling a CP, it only about redundancy, correct, but with the DP it's really about scaling up and out. But still, a CP is no longer on the bus with the DP, nor on the network. It's on the WAN/Internet, and latencies are orders of magnitude greater. Is anybody doing this and are those latencies acceptable? On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 2:59 PM Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:

With a reasonable design, it separates the scale issues of the control plane from the scale issues of the data plane. And since the relationship between those two scale factors is different for different deployments, it allows you as an operator to build for your needs. It also, with suitable designs separates the failure modes.

Whether either of those applies in your case probably depends upon your needs and what vendors you find useful.

Yours,

Joel On 3/22/2023 5:53 PM, Tom Mitchell wrote:

What is it about the architecture that makes it a preferred solution. I get that centralizing the user databases makes sense, but why the control plane. What benefit does that have?

-- Tom

On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 2:17 PM <brian.johnson@netgeek.us> wrote:

...

The CUPS makes a lot of sense for this application. Latency is dependent on the design, and equipment used. I’ve seen/done several designs for this using two different vendors equipment and two different BNG software stacks.

When I do a design for BNG from scratch, this is how I do it now. :)

As always… YMMV.

- Brian

On Mar 22, 2023, at 4:02 PM, Tom Mitchell <tmitchell@netelastic.com> wrote:

Anyone have any thoughts on this CUPS thing? I have a customer asking, but it seems the lack of CP resiliency and additional latency between the DP and CP make this a really dumb idea. Has anyone tried it? Does it make any sense?

Thanks!