[186781] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: VPLS Providers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Mon Jan 4 04:19:36 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>, Chris Burwell <cburwell@gmail.com>
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 11:19:27 +0200
In-Reply-To: <568698F9.6010206@foobar.org>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 1/Jan/16 17:19, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> If you're talking a requirement for connecting geographically separated
> locations, there are sound technical reasons for avoiding vpls like the
> plague. Unless there are overriding technical reasons why it wouldn't
> work, l3vpn will almost always provide a far better quality service.
Almost every time a customer has asked me for VPLS (or EVPN), they've
been just fine with l3vpn as a suggested alternative.
Other customers are all about doing their own routing...
Mark.
