IMHO, this was a poorly written article. From a security standpoint, every argument against MPLS-VPNs could also apply to ATM or F/R PVCs in that none of the three provide any encryption. They try to paint MPLS as something its not, then criticize it for not being what they want it to be. It's akin to criticizing an automobile for not being able to fly. I thought it most ludicrous that Tom Nolle would criticize MPLS-VPNs because they will likely only be used on carrier's private IP networks. Based on that logic, we should also criticize ATM and Frame Relay since carriers only offer services across their own backbones. I also found it interesting that the critics of MPLS as "bad for the 'net" work for a company that currently offers MPLS-based VPN services in the U.S. (IP Enabled Frame Relay) and is rolling those services out to Europe while also expanding them to support ATM speeds. I'm betting that there are quite a few very upset product managers at AT&T this morning. Irwin

-----Original Message----- From: Hank Nussbacher [mailto:hank@att.net.il] Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 1:37 AM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: MPLS VPNs or not?

Experts call MPLS bad for 'Net

http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2001/0806mpls.html

Intersting read. This should start a nice long thread :-)

-Hank