[88500] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CAUTION: Potentially Dumb Question...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher L. Morrow)
Tue Feb 7 22:09:11 2006
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 03:07:58 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@verizonbusiness.com>
In-reply-to: <17383.45551.231401.667090@roam.psg.com>
To: NANOG <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> > I'm interested in responses to this ... MPLS is still a four letter word
> > .. :)
>
> <http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2006-02/converged.html>
>
here's me hiding this article from 'management' who are again chasing the
'converged' network :( In some cases it appears convergence makes some
sense, I think often though (in my very humble experience) it's more of a
buzzword-compliance test than anything else. In the case which kicked off
this discussion I was struck that perhaps an older and simpler solution
(ipsec vpn and some strict firewalling) would provide the seperation
necessary over a single network connection.
Oh the fun of converged networks, mpls private vpn's :)
