North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: CAUTION: Potentially Dumb Question...

  • From: Jason Frisvold
  • Date: Mon Feb 06 15:25:35 2006
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta;; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=IeU+pchiWsWRDpkcRlHGlNhh3m2gZreA43HjI/epkNS7mw3BTVE7yo6jUldhlTYaFbTL79zhGrT23wNRe042afnTCxWuvQUT+h+Dly6NC7mt8slRngFSOwH7dfF77GP5lIHugQJRYiFaT5bGjHI0KcnpNpH3F7d9wC2tehiA3G0=

On 2/6/06, Rich Sena <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm trying to cut a few financial corners in our remote site budgets.  I

*insert network crash noises here*

> have sites that are homed back to the main campus offices via ATM and
> other leased lines.  These sites also currently have dedicated Internet
> access.  I was doing some brain cramming re: MPLS and possibly killing
> our dependence on ATM by going the MPLS route over a common provider.  It
> struck me to venture a guess as to why I couldn't utilize the same
> connection for both - Internet transit via the common provider as well as
> an MPLS mesh between all my sites and my main campuses also via that same
> connection with the common provider...

Wouldn't this be something similar to frame relay?  If I understand
MPLS correctly, this should be a fairly simple implementation ...

> If you feel this is OT then reply to me direct if there is other interest
> I will summarize...

I'm interested in responses to this ...  MPLS is still a four letter word ..  :)

> --
> Rich Sena - [email protected]

Jason 'XenoPhage' Frisvold
[email protected]