RE: MLPPP over MPLS

["Peering" <Peering () xspedius com>]

I've been told by Juniper that the MTU negotiation problem was fixed in
the 7.x versions.  We're upgrading soon, so I hope to find out for
myself.

Diane Turley 
Sr. Network Engineer 
Xspedius Communications Co. 
636-625-7178 

        -----Original Message-----
        From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On
Behalf Of Brent A O'Keeffe
        Sent: Monday, February 20, 2006 7:57 AM
        To: Jon Lewis
        Cc: Jon R. Kibler; nanog () merit net
        Subject: Re: MLPPP over MPLS
        
        

        It may also be worth noting that if the provider is running
Juniper and not Cisco, there are fragmentation issues with certain
versions of Juniper code.  The MLPPP session cannot agree on an MTU and
usually stop somewhere around 100 bytes if they do.  The workaround is
to implement "ppp multilink fragment disable" on the Cisco Multilink
interface. 
        
        Brent 
        
        
        
Jon Lewis <jlewis () lewis org> 
Sent by: owner-nanog () merit edu 

02/17/2006 03:38 PM 

To
"Jon R. Kibler" <Jon.Kibler () aset com> 
cc
nanog () merit net 
Subject
Re: MLPPP over MPLS

        




        
        On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Jon R. Kibler wrote:
        
        > We have a customer that is implementing an MPLS network that
will have 2 
        > to 6 T1 feeds at some locations that will be using MLPPP for
channel 
        > bonding. This is a telco provided network that will be
customer managed.
        
        It's not clear from your message, but I'm assuming the MLPPP
will be from 
        PE to CE and that the MPLS you speak of is MPLS VPN.  If that's
the case, 
        on the customer end, it's just a MLPPP, and on your end, it's an
MLPPP 
        with an "ip vrf forwarding foo" statement.  It's probably more
than the 
        average CCNA can handle (but so are MLPPP, MPLS, and most day to
day IOS 
        config work).  Anyone who actually uses IOS on a regular basis
(as opposed 
        to someone who crammed for an exam and knows squat) should have
no trouble 
        with it.
        
        > The customer is being told by their router vendor that an
MLPPP/MPLS 
        > network is 'too complex' to be managed by anyone except for
the router 
        > vendor's VARs or the telco. They indicated that it would be
impossible 
        > for the customer's router vendor certified network person to
come up to 
        > speed on MLPPP/MPLS configurations and manage such a network
-- that it 
        > takes years to adequately learn how to manage that type of
network 
        > configuration.
        
        I think someone may be confusing "providing MPLS service" with
"buying 
        MPLS service".  A customer buying MPLS VPN service never sees
any of the 
        MPLS tags or messes with MPLS/tag-switching commands.  There is
no added 
        complexity...or at least there doesn't need to be any.
        
        > ==================================================
        > Filtered by: TRUSTEM.COM's Email Filtering Service
        > http://www.trustem.com/
        > No Spam. No Viruses. Just Good Clean Email.
        
        
        Virus-free, because I say it is...and I run Pine on Linux :)
        
        
----------------------------------------------------------------------
         Jon Lewis                   |  I route
         Senior Network Engineer     |  therefore you are
         Atlantic Net                |
        _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public
key_________