[117266] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network Ring
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (sthaug@nethelp.no)
Tue Sep 8 15:06:13 2009
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 21:04:45 +0200 (CEST)
To: justin@justinshore.com
From: sthaug@nethelp.no
In-Reply-To: <4AA64018.7080006@justinshore.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> Rod Beck wrote:
> > What is EAPS?
>
> A joke of a "standard" and something to be avoided at all costs. I
> would echo the last part about Extreme switches too.
Disagree. I don't believe anybody would claim EAPS is a "standard"
just because an RFC has been published. In any case, EAPS is working
quite well for us, with rapid L2 rerouting in ring based structures.
And *much* simpler than RSTP/MST. Or VPLS, for that matter.
As for Extreme switches - they have their strengths and weaknesses,
just like any other product. We use lots of Summit X450/X450a, for
L2 only, and have been generally reasonably happy with them. If I
could buy a similarly featured product from Cisco, for a similar
price, I might well choose Cisco. But at least in our case Cisco
*doesn't* have a competitive product (case in point: ME3400 - too
few ports, too few MAC addresses, funky licensing even if you just
want to do simple QinQ).
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
