[40381] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: MPLS VPNs or not?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Yakov Rekhter)
Wed Aug 8 05:05:01 2001
Message-Id: <200108080904.f7894NH52164@merlot.juniper.net>
To: Vadim Antonov <avg@exigengroup.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 07 Aug 2001 19:00:38 PDT."
<Pine.LNX.4.10.10108071848020.29904-100000@arch.exigengroup.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <40988.997261463.1@juniper.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 02:04:23 -0700
From: Yakov Rekhter <yakov@juniper.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Vadim,
>
> Yakov, that was not nice.
>
> If you look at the "opposition" side you'll see quite a lot of people who
> had to run real backbones; and who have a feeling of impact featurism has
> on reliability of code. For what it worth, nothing makes you appreciate
> simplicity and quality as getting dragged out of bed in the middle of the
> night to fix backbone falling down in flames because of yet anothing
> interesting glitch caused by the flaky but feature-rich software.
>
> My position was always consistent - if you can do something (like VPN) at
> the edge boxes w/o inroducing complexity into core transport, this is the
> way to do that.
Then to be consistent with your own position, you certainly should agree
that 2547 is "the way to do" VPNs, as with 2547 all the VPN-related
information is confined to the PEs (where "PE" stands for provider *edge*),
and none of the P (core) routers maintain any VPN-related information.
Yakov.
