Anyone with advice on the ME3400 which some telcos use for Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) services? Specifically looking for layer2 vs layer 3. At Layer 2 NNI/UNI vs dot1q qinq vs private VLANs. At Layer 3 multiple VRF CE/PE support. Specifically which connectivity options have been found to be most reliable and scalable. ________________________________ This communication, together with any attachments or embedded links, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail message and delete the original and all copies of the communication, along with any attachments or embedded links, from your system.
Checkout me3600/me3800 ngn metro boxes which supports service level/efp configuration. Also commonly known as cisco's evc infrastructute currently supported on 7600 with es+ cards and asr 9k. I dont think there is any other box from cost prespective which supports most of the desired metro features as me3600/3800 does. On Feb 28, 2012 4:08 PM, "Holmes,David A" <dholmes@mwdh2o.com> wrote:
Anyone with advice on the ME3400 which some telcos use for Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) services? Specifically looking for layer2 vs layer 3. At Layer 2 NNI/UNI vs dot1q qinq vs private VLANs. At Layer 3 multiple VRF CE/PE support. Specifically which connectivity options have been found to be most reliable and scalable.
________________________________ This communication, together with any attachments or embedded links, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail message and delete the original and all copies of the communication, along with any attachments or embedded links, from your system.
You'll need to use a metroipaccess image on the me3400 if you want more than 2 NNI interfaces. We don't do any triple play or ETTH services so I can't speak on that but as a layer 2 customer prem device for Carrier Ethernet services it works well and it's hard to beat the price. Would have been great if it was MPLS capable at its current price point though! It's functional as a Layer 3 switch but I don't think it is very robust as a router. If you are not married to Cisco, the Brocade CES is worth looking in to. MPLS capable across all Ethernet ports. More expensive though. Andy S -----Original Message----- From: Ramanpreet Singh [mailto:sikandar.raman@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 22:45 To: Holmes,David A Cc: North American Network Operators' Group Subject: Re: Cisco ME3400 Checkout me3600/me3800 ngn metro boxes which supports service level/efp configuration. Also commonly known as cisco's evc infrastructute currently supported on 7600 with es+ cards and asr 9k. I dont think there is any other box from cost prespective which supports most of the desired metro features as me3600/3800 does. On Feb 28, 2012 4:08 PM, "Holmes,David A" <dholmes@mwdh2o.com> wrote:
Anyone with advice on the ME3400 which some telcos use for Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) services? Specifically looking for layer2 vs layer 3. At Layer 2 NNI/UNI vs dot1q qinq vs private VLANs. At Layer 3 multiple VRF CE/PE support. Specifically which connectivity options have been found
to be most reliable and scalable.
________________________________ This communication, together with any attachments or embedded links, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, dissemination, distribution or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return
e-mail message and delete the original and all copies of the communication, along with any attachments or embedded links, from your system.
participants (3)
-
Andy Susag -
Holmes,David A -
Ramanpreet Singh