[135877] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: EPC backhaul networks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Sun Jan 30 13:10:07 2011
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2011 19:09:15 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikcODvdkQO2TNXeaTYrrUo7RquNk=YqMx2rZcUu@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Glen Kent wrote:
> I would like to understand why there is a preference for L3 VPNs over L2
> VPNs for the EPC backhaul networks? We can use both layer 2 and layer 3
> VPNs for communication between the eNodeB and the MME or S-GW, so why is
> it that most providers prefer L3 over L2.
Becuase the lessons learnt in the last 30 years or so of networking is
that large L2 domains are considered harmful. If you subnet them down in
different vlans, it means for every new vlan you need to configure
something on the MME/SGW.
It's just easier and safer to break it down into smaller L3 domains that
you route between.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
