Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Cisco (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f27-cisco.html)
-   -   L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging? (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t32485-l2tpv3-vs-gre-for-layer-2-bridging.html)

Rob 02-27-2004 04:54 PM

L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging?
 
I need to create a solution which allows me to bridge non-IP traffic
between two sites, but I'd like to do it over the Internet instead of
getting a leased line. With a P-to-P T1, this is easy. Turn on
bridging of the appropriate interfaces and away you go.

But over an IP network, what is the best way? Does basic GRE
tunneling work, or does it require L2TPv3, of which I read a little
about on CCO.

Assume the ISP will not be helping with this endeavor. I want to do
it via the endpoint routers which I control.

Thanks,
Robert


Erik Tamminga 02-28-2004 11:13 AM

Re: L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging?
 
Hi,

Haven't done L2TPv3 but GRE works fine. The approach is actually the same as
with the PtP T1, just bridge between the appropriate interfaces (ex. int
Ethernet0/0 and int Tunnel0).

Erik

"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ddtu309sjm825ih2fc8omvls25od9uiv2a@4ax.com...
> I need to create a solution which allows me to bridge non-IP traffic
> between two sites, but I'd like to do it over the Internet instead of
> getting a leased line. With a P-to-P T1, this is easy. Turn on
> bridging of the appropriate interfaces and away you go.
>
> But over an IP network, what is the best way? Does basic GRE
> tunneling work, or does it require L2TPv3, of which I read a little
> about on CCO.
>
> Assume the ISP will not be helping with this endeavor. I want to do
> it via the endpoint routers which I control.
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
>




Rob 02-28-2004 12:51 PM

Re: L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging?
 
I haven't been able to put Bridge-group X on a Tunnel interface.



On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 12:13:13 +0100, "Erik Tamminga"
<newsgroups@NeOtammiSnPgAaM.nl> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Haven't done L2TPv3 but GRE works fine. The approach is actually the same as
>with the PtP T1, just bridge between the appropriate interfaces (ex. int
>Ethernet0/0 and int Tunnel0).
>
>Erik
>
>"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:ddtu309sjm825ih2fc8omvls25od9uiv2a@4ax.com.. .
>> I need to create a solution which allows me to bridge non-IP traffic
>> between two sites, but I'd like to do it over the Internet instead of
>> getting a leased line. With a P-to-P T1, this is easy. Turn on
>> bridging of the appropriate interfaces and away you go.
>>
>> But over an IP network, what is the best way? Does basic GRE
>> tunneling work, or does it require L2TPv3, of which I read a little
>> about on CCO.
>>
>> Assume the ISP will not be helping with this endeavor. I want to do
>> it via the endpoint routers which I control.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robert
>>

>



Craig Johnson 02-29-2004 05:31 PM

Re: L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging?
 
I tried bridging over a GRE tunnel once; I had a terrible time of it. You
should probably look into using DLSw+ for this. This is what its designed
for, and you can encrypt it via IPSEC. This is probably the best way to do
it. I've never done L2TPv3 VPNs before; they may work better.

Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965

"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:mj31409micqi1rj4efk9b89rqesijq7i6s@4ax.com...
> I haven't been able to put Bridge-group X on a Tunnel interface.
>
>
>
> On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 12:13:13 +0100, "Erik Tamminga"
> <newsgroups@NeOtammiSnPgAaM.nl> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >Haven't done L2TPv3 but GRE works fine. The approach is actually the same

as
> >with the PtP T1, just bridge between the appropriate interfaces (ex. int
> >Ethernet0/0 and int Tunnel0).
> >
> >Erik
> >
> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:ddtu309sjm825ih2fc8omvls25od9uiv2a@4ax.com.. .
> >> I need to create a solution which allows me to bridge non-IP traffic
> >> between two sites, but I'd like to do it over the Internet instead of
> >> getting a leased line. With a P-to-P T1, this is easy. Turn on
> >> bridging of the appropriate interfaces and away you go.
> >>
> >> But over an IP network, what is the best way? Does basic GRE
> >> tunneling work, or does it require L2TPv3, of which I read a little
> >> about on CCO.
> >>
> >> Assume the ISP will not be helping with this endeavor. I want to do
> >> it via the endpoint routers which I control.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Robert
> >>

> >

>




Rob 02-29-2004 07:08 PM

Re: L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging?
 
I didn't think of DLSW. It routes any layer 2 packet, not just
SNA/NetBIOS?




On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:31:27 -0600, "Craig Johnson"
<cjohnson6965@spamno.nospam.comcast.net> wrote:

>I tried bridging over a GRE tunnel once; I had a terrible time of it. You
>should probably look into using DLSw+ for this. This is what its designed
>for, and you can encrypt it via IPSEC. This is probably the best way to do
>it. I've never done L2TPv3 VPNs before; they may work better.
>
>Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965
>
>"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:mj31409micqi1rj4efk9b89rqesijq7i6s@4ax.com.. .
>> I haven't been able to put Bridge-group X on a Tunnel interface.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 12:13:13 +0100, "Erik Tamminga"
>> <newsgroups@NeOtammiSnPgAaM.nl> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >Haven't done L2TPv3 but GRE works fine. The approach is actually the same

>as
>> >with the PtP T1, just bridge between the appropriate interfaces (ex. int
>> >Ethernet0/0 and int Tunnel0).
>> >
>> >Erik
>> >
>> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:ddtu309sjm825ih2fc8omvls25od9uiv2a@4ax.com.. .
>> >> I need to create a solution which allows me to bridge non-IP traffic
>> >> between two sites, but I'd like to do it over the Internet instead of
>> >> getting a leased line. With a P-to-P T1, this is easy. Turn on
>> >> bridging of the appropriate interfaces and away you go.
>> >>
>> >> But over an IP network, what is the best way? Does basic GRE
>> >> tunneling work, or does it require L2TPv3, of which I read a little
>> >> about on CCO.
>> >>
>> >> Assume the ISP will not be helping with this endeavor. I want to do
>> >> it via the endpoint routers which I control.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Robert
>> >>
>> >

>>

>



Craig Johnson 02-29-2004 08:58 PM

Re: L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging?
 
DLSw+ will pass all of your ethernet frames. What makes it so powerful for
applications like this is that you can restrict communication between MAC
addresses, which will lower the bandwidth you use. You can also
troubleshoot issues much more effectively with DLSw+. Now, the only thing
you need to worry about is performance. Layer 2 tends to be a little delay
sensitive, and you might have issues going over the internet. This applies
to whatever technology you decide to use, though.

Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965

"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:n3e44096m547rusmmp8hjh87omfog5k4j4@4ax.com...
> I didn't think of DLSW. It routes any layer 2 packet, not just
> SNA/NetBIOS?
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:31:27 -0600, "Craig Johnson"
> <cjohnson6965@spamno.nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >I tried bridging over a GRE tunnel once; I had a terrible time of it.

You
> >should probably look into using DLSw+ for this. This is what its

designed
> >for, and you can encrypt it via IPSEC. This is probably the best way to

do
> >it. I've never done L2TPv3 VPNs before; they may work better.
> >
> >Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965
> >
> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:mj31409micqi1rj4efk9b89rqesijq7i6s@4ax.com.. .
> >> I haven't been able to put Bridge-group X on a Tunnel interface.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 12:13:13 +0100, "Erik Tamminga"
> >> <newsgroups@NeOtammiSnPgAaM.nl> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi,
> >> >
> >> >Haven't done L2TPv3 but GRE works fine. The approach is actually the

same
> >as
> >> >with the PtP T1, just bridge between the appropriate interfaces (ex.

int
> >> >Ethernet0/0 and int Tunnel0).
> >> >
> >> >Erik
> >> >
> >> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:ddtu309sjm825ih2fc8omvls25od9uiv2a@4ax.com.. .
> >> >> I need to create a solution which allows me to bridge non-IP traffic
> >> >> between two sites, but I'd like to do it over the Internet instead

of
> >> >> getting a leased line. With a P-to-P T1, this is easy. Turn on
> >> >> bridging of the appropriate interfaces and away you go.
> >> >>
> >> >> But over an IP network, what is the best way? Does basic GRE
> >> >> tunneling work, or does it require L2TPv3, of which I read a little
> >> >> about on CCO.
> >> >>
> >> >> Assume the ISP will not be helping with this endeavor. I want to do
> >> >> it via the endpoint routers which I control.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Robert
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>

> >

>




Rob 03-01-2004 05:48 PM

Re: L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging?
 
I asksed the TAC. They said DLSW will not work, but L2TPv3 is what I
want. Reading up on it.......




On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:58:31 -0600, "Craig Johnson"
<cjohnson6965@spamno.nospam.comcast.net> wrote:

>DLSw+ will pass all of your ethernet frames. What makes it so powerful for
>applications like this is that you can restrict communication between MAC
>addresses, which will lower the bandwidth you use. You can also
>troubleshoot issues much more effectively with DLSw+. Now, the only thing
>you need to worry about is performance. Layer 2 tends to be a little delay
>sensitive, and you might have issues going over the internet. This applies
>to whatever technology you decide to use, though.
>
>Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965
>
>"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:n3e44096m547rusmmp8hjh87omfog5k4j4@4ax.com.. .
>> I didn't think of DLSW. It routes any layer 2 packet, not just
>> SNA/NetBIOS?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:31:27 -0600, "Craig Johnson"
>> <cjohnson6965@spamno.nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> >I tried bridging over a GRE tunnel once; I had a terrible time of it.

>You
>> >should probably look into using DLSw+ for this. This is what its

>designed
>> >for, and you can encrypt it via IPSEC. This is probably the best way to

>do
>> >it. I've never done L2TPv3 VPNs before; they may work better.
>> >
>> >Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965
>> >
>> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:mj31409micqi1rj4efk9b89rqesijq7i6s@4ax.com.. .
>> >> I haven't been able to put Bridge-group X on a Tunnel interface.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 12:13:13 +0100, "Erik Tamminga"
>> >> <newsgroups@NeOtammiSnPgAaM.nl> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> >Haven't done L2TPv3 but GRE works fine. The approach is actually the

>same
>> >as
>> >> >with the PtP T1, just bridge between the appropriate interfaces (ex.

>int
>> >> >Ethernet0/0 and int Tunnel0).
>> >> >
>> >> >Erik
>> >> >
>> >> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> >> >news:ddtu309sjm825ih2fc8omvls25od9uiv2a@4ax.com.. .
>> >> >> I need to create a solution which allows me to bridge non-IP traffic
>> >> >> between two sites, but I'd like to do it over the Internet instead

>of
>> >> >> getting a leased line. With a P-to-P T1, this is easy. Turn on
>> >> >> bridging of the appropriate interfaces and away you go.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But over an IP network, what is the best way? Does basic GRE
>> >> >> tunneling work, or does it require L2TPv3, of which I read a little
>> >> >> about on CCO.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Assume the ISP will not be helping with this endeavor. I want to do
>> >> >> it via the endpoint routers which I control.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> Robert
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >

>>

>



Craig Johnson 03-01-2004 08:18 PM

Re: L2TPv3 vs GRE for layer 2 bridging?
 
L2TPv3 is a great technology, and probably will be what you want. However,
it's really new and requires 12.3T, which I'm not prepared to run yet.
They are wrong about DLSw+, though. It will bridge anything in ethernet.
You have to use a BVI and not put an IP on the ethernet interface, but it
will work. I'm not sure why they would have told you that it doesn't. They
may not support this configuration, though. If you've got the means, use
L2TPv3. It's definitely the way to go.

Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965
"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3qh6409n9872nogefjl0uqtt6b81qqafub@4ax.com...
> I asksed the TAC. They said DLSW will not work, but L2TPv3 is what I
> want. Reading up on it.......
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 14:58:31 -0600, "Craig Johnson"
> <cjohnson6965@spamno.nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >DLSw+ will pass all of your ethernet frames. What makes it so powerful

for
> >applications like this is that you can restrict communication between MAC
> >addresses, which will lower the bandwidth you use. You can also
> >troubleshoot issues much more effectively with DLSw+. Now, the only

thing
> >you need to worry about is performance. Layer 2 tends to be a little

delay
> >sensitive, and you might have issues going over the internet. This

applies
> >to whatever technology you decide to use, though.
> >
> >Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965
> >
> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:n3e44096m547rusmmp8hjh87omfog5k4j4@4ax.com.. .
> >> I didn't think of DLSW. It routes any layer 2 packet, not just
> >> SNA/NetBIOS?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 11:31:27 -0600, "Craig Johnson"
> >> <cjohnson6965@spamno.nospam.comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I tried bridging over a GRE tunnel once; I had a terrible time of it.

> >You
> >> >should probably look into using DLSw+ for this. This is what its

> >designed
> >> >for, and you can encrypt it via IPSEC. This is probably the best way

to
> >do
> >> >it. I've never done L2TPv3 VPNs before; they may work better.
> >> >
> >> >Craig Johnson, CCIE #6965
> >> >
> >> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:mj31409micqi1rj4efk9b89rqesijq7i6s@4ax.com.. .
> >> >> I haven't been able to put Bridge-group X on a Tunnel interface.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 12:13:13 +0100, "Erik Tamminga"
> >> >> <newsgroups@NeOtammiSnPgAaM.nl> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Haven't done L2TPv3 but GRE works fine. The approach is actually

the
> >same
> >> >as
> >> >> >with the PtP T1, just bridge between the appropriate interfaces

(ex.
> >int
> >> >> >Ethernet0/0 and int Tunnel0).
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Erik
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"Rob" <bobh1234@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >> >news:ddtu309sjm825ih2fc8omvls25od9uiv2a@4ax.com.. .
> >> >> >> I need to create a solution which allows me to bridge non-IP

traffic
> >> >> >> between two sites, but I'd like to do it over the Internet

instead
> >of
> >> >> >> getting a leased line. With a P-to-P T1, this is easy. Turn on
> >> >> >> bridging of the appropriate interfaces and away you go.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> But over an IP network, what is the best way? Does basic GRE
> >> >> >> tunneling work, or does it require L2TPv3, of which I read a

little
> >> >> >> about on CCO.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Assume the ISP will not be helping with this endeavor. I want to

do
> >> >> >> it via the endpoint routers which I control.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> >> Robert
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>

> >

>




NixLorien 11-02-2011 01:47 PM

On what line cards running L2TPv3 and GRE on 7600 platform? Necessary forwarding through the transit network MPLS L2 channel.

Thanks in advance!


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.