FR OR ppp encapsulation inder the interface?

Unanswered Question
paolo bevilacqua Tue, 03/09/2010 - 01:13
User Badges:
  • Super Gold, 25000 points or more
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

According to the service by telco.

Ganesh Hariharan Tue, 03/09/2010 - 01:17
User Badges:
  • Purple, 4500 points or more
  • Community Spotlight Award,

    Member's Choice, February 2016

Hi Guys

why we configure either FR OR ppp encapsulation inder the interface?


Thanks


THANKS CISCO


Hi,


HDLC, PPP, or Frame-relay are all well known WAN protocols which are been used by organization to connect with external world over LL or FR.


Point to Point Protocol (PPP) is used for most every dial up connection to the Internet. PPP is documented in  RFC 1661. PPP is based on HDLC and is very similar. Both work well to connect point to point leased lines.


Frame Relay is a Layer 2 protocol and commonly known as a service from carriers. Frame relay creates a private network through a carrier’s network. This is done with permanent virtual circuits (PVC).


Hope to Help !!


Ganesh.H

Tharak Abraham Tue, 03/09/2010 - 05:47
User Badges:
  • Bronze, 100 points or more

In addition to the above points,


Running PPP over FR is also a recommended implementation.

It gives the advantages of authentication, reliability and even bind multiple PVC's (MLPP) which a native FR cannot do.


Just my 2 cents,

paolo bevilacqua Tue, 03/09/2010 - 06:12
User Badges:
  • Super Gold, 25000 points or more
  • Hall of Fame,

    Founding Member

Running PPP over FR is also a recommended implementation.

That is debatable


It gives the advantages of authentication,

not needed unless you suspect evil intententions in you FR SP.


reliability

none added whatsoever.


and even bind multiple PVC's (MLPP) which a native FR cannot do.

Actually, IOS supports Multilink Frame Releay (FRF16.1)

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2s/feature/guide/fs_mfr.html


What is 100% true however, is that using PPP over FR, one gains encapsulation and configuration overhead, and increased exposure to bugs.

Tharak Abraham Tue, 03/09/2010 - 20:33
User Badges:
  • Bronze, 100 points or more

Well, my Apologies for adding the word recommended along.. (its my fav and most used).


Bevilaqua is spot on with FRF16.


But the intention of the answer was in response to the question and to the subsequent discussion that followed.


Nevertheless, again an acceptable option to know since there isn'nt any option to bind virtual templates or dialer profiles over a FR network

Actions

This Discussion