Re: qwest optical ethernet

On Aug 10, 3:14 pm, "stephen" <stephen_h...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"scale" <cof...@xxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1186699653.620404.99540@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Aug 9, 12:04 pm, Doug McIntyre <mer...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
scale <cof...@xxxxxxx> writes:
Anyone have experience with this?

Yes.

im about to connect a few locations to a host location. The technology
uses layer2 packet switching. I have 2811 routers so i should be all
set but im in search of some configuration examples.

Why are you going to put routers in? Just to reuse them? Or do you
want to reduce your broadcast domain to either side?

Qwest will hand you off layer-2 ethernet on ether side. Plug it in,
you have a direct ethernet between the two sites.

plug the WAN into a L3 switch so you have something isolating the subnets at
each end.

or just use 1 at the hub site.

it will make diagnostics easier the 1st time things go wrong.







The current WAN is point to point t1 lines and those will be replaced
with this technology. Im curious on how the host site hosts multiple
interfaces in the router? Is it just a sub interface on the fe port on
the wan spoke?
the current encap is ppp. Will this have to change for this
technology?

There's no point in doing PPP over ethernet. Its just a direct
connection.

Its really up to you if you want to specificly route to hide the two
sites behind the routers, or just flatten out your network.
Configuration-wise if you route it'll be simple.

int Fast 0/0
ip addr ...
int Fast 0/1
ip addr ...

ip route 192.168.168.0 255.255.255.0 to other router's IP address.

Im not real familiar with how the technology works but i assume i have
to run some sort of sub interface on the hub router to accomdate all
the locations / lines comming in as the hand off is a singe ethernet
line.

The technology is basic ethernet. Its very straightforward. In many
ways much simpler than T1.

Thanks for the response Doug!

The idea is to have each remote network on their own subnet.

L3 switches are much faster than routers for routing between ethernets at
the same price point.



WE are adding in a 3rd card into each router for futue addtional VOIP.

IM not 100% sure how VOIP with play into this in the future but that
is where we stand.
Id like to keep the subnets that we have in place now for future
use...thus the routers.

So that being said.....does there need to be any encapsulation?

How about the interface on the main router at the hub. It will be
accepting traffic from all the spokes through one interface....would i
subinterface that out fe0/0.1....fe0/0.2 etc etc

it could be VLANs, or sepearate interfaces - but you need to know which is
which before you can connect it all up.

this sounds like classic telco "we cant be bothered to give you a diagram".

insist on docs before you allow the install to start so you can get your
networks ready.

Right now with the t1 lines in place it is easy.....you have the exact
number of t1 lines comming in as you have interfaces in your router :)

--
Regards

stephen_h...@xxxxxxxxxxxx - replace xyz with ntl- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Thanks for the reply. Yes it is like pulling teeth with the telco on
the facts about the technology. It is geting frustrating.

Anyway

Are you saying i should be able to throw my 2811 routers at each site
and then at the hub were that line comes in .....throw in a L3 switch
and terminate in that? That sounds about right :) I was wondering on
doing this. Would the L3 switch then need to be VLAN'd up on each port
comming in (say there are 5...would i need 5 VLANs running as the
"spokes" to terminate in the switch like this?

As far as the remote routers are concerned will any VLAN setup need to
be done in those routers? I dont believe the routers care. The subnets
are already in place. WE are trying to make a cut from existing T1
lines into this new Optical Ethernet.....which should make life easier
(and faster) but we want to keep the subnets (and the router hardware
at each site).

im getting closer :) Thanks for the feedback.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DNS replication on 2 domain on 2 forests
    ... Routers work at the network protocol level to ... There is NO implication of "only two" segments in bridges; ... Bridges EXTEND the broadcast domain by uniting what ... When one uses the term "switch", ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.dns)
  • The cat came and stayed..
    ... By the time you have finished reading this, I am sure you would have come across the most fascinating networking issue haunted by our friendly ghost Casper. ... Having exploited most of my resources, I finally decided to involve our ISP hoping that this would be the end of it...but it wasn't supposed to be that way. ... But, since the line was given, we felt that we were not only having intermittent problems that required switch reset but also felt that we were not getting the right speed and the data transfer rateswas really not befitting a 100Mbps link. ... Now a strange thing is that when we configure the two routers in 'bridging' mode and start data transfer across, the speed becomes incrementally fast. ...
    (Pen-Test)
  • Re: Xbox initiates but loses connection
    ... The BEFW11S4 v2 WAP w/ 4 port switch is not a WAP. ... Incompatible Routers ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.mediacenter)
  • Re: qwest optical ethernet
    ... you have a direct ethernet between the two sites. ... L3 switches are much faster than routers for routing between ethernets ... and then at the hub were that line comes in .....throw in a L3 switch ... comming in (say there are 5...would i need 5 VLANs running as the ...
    (comp.dcom.sys.cisco)
  • Re: Wireless bridge setup
    ... 10/100 Switch -> Servers connected to the switch. ... got a brand shiny new Netgear WGE101 wireless Ethernet bridge yesterday. ... Anyone using Linksys routers out there, ...
    (comp.unix.solaris)
Loading