Frame Relay Upgrade

Answered Question
Apr 24th, 2007

My customer has a HUGE frame relay network. They're reaching their maximum bandwidth and im desperately thinking of ways to allow them to use dual T1s or Bonded T1's on their network. I was hoping that some sort of IMA type solution would be available as T1s are easy to come by for them but am now starting to lean into telling them that they should just leave the non maxxed out connections on the Frame Relay and Migrate the maxxed out connections to a Parallel ATM cloud.

My Questions are:

1. Does a 2821 router have ATM capabilities as I haven't seen any.

2. Would they be able to fraction off or channelize some of the T3 that's currently connecting to their frame core? Currently they have 45mbs and was thinking of taking about 10 t1's off of it.

3. Would "MFR" be a good candidate in this case? Multi Link Frame Relay? Or is that something for ATM also?

Any other ideas here would be great. I'm trying to finish this report by tomorrow...

THanks!

I have this problem too.
0 votes
Correct Answer by leighharrison about 9 years 7 months ago

Howdy ho,

The best option here in the UK at the moment is to go for MLPS, you can have any interface speed you like, all the way up to a gig into the cloud.

Channelising your T3 should be ok, depending on it's current configuration. If it's already channelised, then you'll be able to specify what you want the different channels to do.

Personally, if these links all go to the same sites, then I would configure up the routing to do the load balancing for you, as it would be nice and dynamic and plenty configurable.

Hope that helps a bit,

Regards,

LH

** Please rate all posts **

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 5 (4 ratings)
Loading.
Correct Answer
leighharrison Wed, 04/25/2007 - 04:28

Howdy ho,

The best option here in the UK at the moment is to go for MLPS, you can have any interface speed you like, all the way up to a gig into the cloud.

Channelising your T3 should be ok, depending on it's current configuration. If it's already channelised, then you'll be able to specify what you want the different channels to do.

Personally, if these links all go to the same sites, then I would configure up the routing to do the load balancing for you, as it would be nice and dynamic and plenty configurable.

Hope that helps a bit,

Regards,

LH

** Please rate all posts **

ixholla69 Wed, 04/25/2007 - 05:23

Ok so let me get this straight because the research that I've done they're not to specific about interfaces so i'm kind of confused.

Let's say 1 location I have has a regualar T1 interface into the router you know that one that has the CSU/DSU built in and it's got a T1 connection into an FR cloud. I could take that same interface and with no issues be able to get the same type of connectin into an MPLS Core?

What about an ADSL connection? Would this be to hit a new MPLS Backbone as well?

Maybe if there was a good write up on MPLS that I could take a look at explaining the technology would help. lol

leighharrison Wed, 04/25/2007 - 05:38

Hey there,

Have a look at these links:-

http://www.btglobalservices.com/business/global/en/products/mpls/index.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPLS

MPLS is a technology that enables you to have a big cloud that all of your sites connect to. They are usually run by a large single carrier and you have your own network within theirs, but you will only ever see your own network.

Depending on the type of speed you want, the interface for you to plug into can be put on site. The BT offering in the UK allows you to connect via adsl, serial/frame relay, ATM or ethernet. Ethernet being the most cost effective solution.

This gives the customer one big stable cloud that they plug all of their sites into. It makes for very easy expansion and growth.

Enjoy!

LH

** Please rate all posts **

Paolo Bevilacqua Wed, 04/25/2007 - 07:20

Hi,

I would like to give an answer in a non-MPLS perspective, following the good old WAN design best practices.

First, the idea of moving circuits with much traffic to ATM, is certainly good.

Now for the Q's:

1: Yes, either NM-1A-T3, and the T1 IMA with either NM, or VWICxxx + AIM-ATM. The latter is also sold in bundles.

2: I would leave the current T3 alone, only after traffic has been moved out, re-evaluate what to do.

3: Yes, MFR for the branches is a good idea, It is more economical and efficient than ATM. However, also if the SP does not support MFR, the router is able to use other tecniques where there is more than one FR circuit anyway.

Idea: Check with the SP, it is quite possible that they offer ATM/FR interworking, that is you have many FR branches with T1, and the HQ is connected via OC-3 ATM. That would require a minimum of a good 7200 router.

Hope this helps, please rate post if it does!

Actions

This Discussion