Welcome to the Cisco Networking Professionals Ask the Expert conversation. This is an opportunity to discuss Metro Ethernet Solutions with Cisco expert Jose Liste. Jose is a Technical Marketing Engineer for Cisco Systems Service Provider Solutions Engineering Metro team. His primary responsibilities include translating customer requirements into Metro Ethernet network architectures and designing and verifying solution functionality. Feel free to post any questions relating Metro Ethernet Solutions. Remember to use the rating system to let Jose know if youve received an adequate response.
Jose might not be able to answer each question due to the volume expected during this event. Our moderators will post many of the unanswered questions in other discussion forums shortly after the event. This event lasts through April 11. Visit this forum often to view responses to your questions and the questions of other community members.
These two acronyms are used within the context of Cisco's Metro Ethernet solution. They describe the functionality present in the access and the core of a SP Metro Ethernet provider.
PE-CLE: Provider Edge Customer Loacated Equipment
PE-POP: Provider Edge Point of Presence
The PE-CLE device is the demarcation point between the customer and the SP. It is located at the customer premise or outside plant. The major functions of the PE-CLE are:
a. Provides connectivity to the customer equipment (CE).
b. Ensures that bandwidth is set according to the SLA by applying per VLAN policing and other QoS features like the marking of the 802.1p (CoS) bits based on the contracted SLA.
On the other hand, the PE-POP is the device that interfaces to the SP core network. The PE-POP provides the following functionality: (assuming that SP has an MPLS core)
a. Mapping the Customer or Service Provider VLAN to an EoMPLS VC
b. Mapping of 802.1p (CoS) to MPLS EXP
The situation is:
we have 2 sites distance between them 200km
we have single mode fiber between them
and 1 shelter between on distanse 100km it will be play as regenerating signal role
Is there any solution to minimaze finance burden for
we are going install at sites Catalyst 6500 is it possible install in shelter cheapear model switch for example 3500?
expected traffic rate will not too much
With 1000BASE-ZX GBICs on a switch like the Catalyst3550, you could drive distances up to 100 kilometers (single mode fiber only)
Therefore, at the middle point of your link you could place a simpler system that will basically switch between the GEs. Just make sure that those ports are on the same VLAN and you should be able to obtain the desired reach
I am including below a link with further references to the technical specifications of the Catalyst 3550 (since it was not clear from your question if the "middle" point is considered a controlled environment, on regards to temperature, power, etc):
Hope this helps,
Is 802.1p a signalling protocol? Does it interfce with RSVP and MPLS LSP creation protocols?
Does the Cisco MEP solution conform QOS thru-out its network?
Which switches are 802.1p aware?
Which Routers are 802.1p aware?
802.1p is not a signalling protocol. It is a 3-bit field (defined by IEEE) that is located in the 802.1Q tag of ethernet frames. The available 8 possibilities (0 - 7) are known as the CoS values.
Most enterprise and SP L2 switches with QoS functionality (e.g. Catalyst 6500, Catalyst 3550, Catalyst 4X00) can match/preserve/rewrite the CoS field.
On the other hand, L3 routers are more concerned with setting the L3 QoS fields (ToS: DSCP, PREC). The .1p bits might get set when using 802.1Q trunk interfaces. In anycase, a multilayer sw on the other side of the trunk should probably be looking at the L3 QoS values comming from a router rather than the L2 QoS.
In a Metro ethernet solution, a SP can use the 802.1p bits to mark customer traffic according to SLAs. If the traffic needs to cross multiple metros (using an IP/MPLS cloud), then the 802.1p bits will determine the value of the MPLS EXP or IP ToS in the SP cloud.
Key point is that L3 QoS parameters from the end customer should not be modified by the SP.
Any clues about EtherWAN, now people talk about Ehernet on WAN side ..
We are in the L3 Switch solutions and am trying to see where we can deploy our Solution , either in Enterprise or Metro and what Diff it makes
It looks that EtherWan is a vendor of Fiber Optic Ethernet gear. I cannot comment about their offering.
But on regards to using Ethernet on the WAN side, we see a variety of service providers around the world (from large PTTs to smaller alternative carriers) offering metro Ethernet services right now. In Europe, providers such as FastWeb, Telia, Telecom Italia and Wienstrom are selling metro services to both businesses and residences. In Asia, providers like Hong Kong Broadband are providing 10Mbps Internet access to over 150000 subscribers and have already passed 1 M homes. They are expanding services to enterprise with offerings such as VPN, fax-to-email, IP Phone and Metro Ethernet Storage. In the US, ILECs have deployed or announced their plans for metro ethernet services.
It is important to differentiate between the delivery of ethernet as the UNI to enterprise customers and the network that the SP will use to deliver that ethernet UNI. It is not required that an SP builds an Ethernet network in order to ethernet UNIs to their customers.
On regards to enterprises, we are finding very large enterprises that are behaving as SP in order to meet their internal connectivity needs. many of them have chosen to use ethernet as the UNI that they will present to their internal departments for WAN connectivity (where before they were using ATM or frame).
Hope this helps,
Hello and thanks for the great forum. I have an interesting question for you. We have a situation where a telco contract is up for renewal. We currently have a MAN with a dedicated OC48 ring with 11 sites. Each of these sites has a mix of Point-to-Point connections ranging from DS3 down to T1's for primary and back up connections to our core sites. All of these travel over the same SONet ring, but different PVC's segregate the traffic.
Now the vendor has sent a proposal offering similar service for each site. But the final alternative is for each site to have an "OC48-node" rather than a T1, DS3, 10MB,100MB, etc. PVC. The really interesting thing is that the cost of the OC48 node is almost half the cost of a 100MB PVC.
My question is this, what are the advantages and disadvantages of using the straight OC48 node (off of our ONS 15454) rather than a PVC point-to-point link? And why would the telco sell it at such a cheaper rate than the 100MB point to point circuit? Is there anything we should be cautious of when considering using the OC48 node over the PVC switched connections?
Thanks in advance.
Background: Currently 6500 LAN switches uplink at 10MB to an ONS 15454 switch connected to a local SONet POP. That POP is then connected to our private SONet for the 6 different areas of the MAN.
would you please post some URL so i can make some researches
about metro ethernet ?
thank you in advance
Try starting with this URL about Cisco Metro solutions:
Sorry for the late reply to your message.
I hope I have not missunderstood your description, but it looks that currently the telco hands off to you a collection of 100MB, DS-3 and DS-1 circuits at different sites throughout your MAN. And that the new proposal is to add a SONET OC-48 node in front of the the MAN ring and use it as the hand off.
On regards to your surprise to the new pricing structure, the real question is really what are they going to let you use out of the new node. I am sure that the Telco will limit the ports that you will have access to but I would assume that the price will depend on the services you get access to and not to just having the node. So that piece is unclear to me from your description.
From the Telco perspective, he might want to locate a piece of equipment that will be able to adapt to your current and future needs. More DS-1s/DS-3 or ethernet ports could be allocated to this new nodes assuming that there BW available in the OC-48 ring. Another reason might be that he is running out of interfaces on the current devices and it might be easier for them to place a new node in front of you and just use an uplink trunk connecting it to the SONET ring.
To me this proposal adds hierarchy to the network and there is nothing you should have to do differently, assuming that you are getting the same services. The pricing piece would still need more information but there might be non-technical reasons also that they have to give a more attractive pricing model.
Hope this helps,