If the reason for L2 transport is purely customer driven and purely ptp, then a L2 VPN solution would be better than directly transporting the frames. If you don't have to bridge it directly, don't. Keep the core at layer 3 wherever possible. L2 can be very hard to debug when there are issues. On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 06:58:51PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
On 20/Oct/16 18:45, Roland Dobbins wrote:
Sure - but it's probably worth revisiting the origins of those requirements, and whether there are better alternatives.
Indeed.
What we've seen is customers who prefer to manage their own IP layer, and just need transport. These types of customers tend to be split between EoDWDM and EoMPLS preferences. Whatever the case, their primary requirement is control of their IP domain.
What we're not seeing anymore is l3vpn requirements, particularly on the back of on-premise IT infrastructure moving into the cloud. We see this driving a lot of regular IP growth.
Mark.
--- Wayne Bouchard web@typo.org Network Dude http://www.typo.org/~web/