The MPLS WG Archive

["Darren Patterson" <dapatter@cisco.com>]

I would have argued that l2 and l3 vpns would co-exist on any providers
network and be sold and used where appropriate. i dont think these are
mutually exclusive, but rather complimentary...the real arguement is on the
model used for l3 vpn's.

regards

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mpls@UU.NET [mailto:owner-mpls@UU.NET]On Behalf Of Rob
> Jaeger
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 October 2000 9:40 PM
> To: Juan Diego Otero
> Cc: Wenbo Sheng; MPLS WG
> Subject: Re: VPN solution
>
>
>
> Juan/Wenbo,
>
> An alternative to draft-rosen-rfc2547bis is l2vpn as described in
> draft-kompella-mpls-l2vpn-01.txt .   One advantage of this method is the
> separation of administrative responsibilities.  In MPLS L2VPNs,  the
> service provider does not participate in the customer's L3 routing. This
> may provide better stability than L3 VPNs.
>
> Rob
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Juan Diego Otero wrote:
>
> > Hi Wenbo,
> >
> > The method to build VPNs most discussed (and that makes me think
> > that is the most popular) in this mailing list is
> > the BGP/MPLS model explained in  draft-rosen-rfc2547bis-02.txt
> . Personally I
> > think this method has a lot of advantages such as scalability,
> security, manageability
> > and use of private addressing. Some of this advantages
> (specially scalability) have been
> > discussed in this mailing list.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Diego
> >
> > Wenbo Sheng wrote:
> >       HI,
> >
> >       Assuming my customer need to create a VPN, I just want to
> know which solution is better - using
> >       MPLS-VPN or virtual routers? Which solution is/will be
> more popular in creating a VPN?
> >
> >       Thanks in advance,
> >
> >       W.S.
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://www.geocities.com/diego_otero/
> >
> >