Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Cisco > Private Frame Relay steps

Reply
Thread Tools

Private Frame Relay steps

 
 
xlate101@yahoo.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2003
I deal with a trucking company that wants to set up a private FR
network with 11 branches in US. They want at least T1 speed on all
links. Is the best solution to provision dedicated T1s to central
office (hub-spoke stuff) and get an Adtran FR switch? Also, do any
major carriers provide private FR services? I'm guessing that they
would let you own your own switches and give you some sort of qOS on
the "public" FR link. I've never set up something like this before and
can't find any good sources on the web re this topic. Any links would
help.

Thanks -
- Lester
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Scooby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-16-2003
You can not provide your own frame relay services. All you really do is get
Frame Relay services from a provider and use a FRAD or router to access the
frame relay network. The Frame switch belong to the telco giving you
service. Yes, the major carriers do provide Frame Relay. Since you have a
spread out network, that is the place to start.

However, I think if I was setting that up, I'd take a good hard look at the
companies offering an MPLS solution.

Also, if qos it not really an issue, perhaps redundant broadband links to
each site would be a better solution and much cheaper.

Frame relay is pretty simple really. Just think of it as the same as a point
to point connection, only you don't need 10 csu/dsu units at your main
location. You put in a router just the same as you would for a p2p
connection. Just configure the encapsulation as frame instead of ppp or
hdlc. These things auto recognize the virtual circuits that the telco sets
up for you (pvc). So, it is mostly plug and play. A real good way to learn
about this stuff is to call the telco and tell them you are thinking of a
Frame Relay solution. They'll come in an give you a real good explanation
about how it works. And, yes, you can run your own qos on it. But, keep in
mind when you order the circuits about CIR (commited information rate)- when
you order a circuit you order circuit speed and CIR. The circuit speed is
what your maximum throughput is (T1 for example) while the CIR is what they
promise you will always have available. They tend to oversubscribe their
services, but not the CIR. So, you need CIR, but it comes at a price.

That's the skinny, let me know if you have any more specific questions.
And, good luck



<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> I deal with a trucking company that wants to set up a private FR
> network with 11 branches in US. They want at least T1 speed on all
> links. Is the best solution to provision dedicated T1s to central
> office (hub-spoke stuff) and get an Adtran FR switch? Also, do any
> major carriers provide private FR services? I'm guessing that they
> would let you own your own switches and give you some sort of qOS on
> the "public" FR link. I've never set up something like this before and
> can't find any good sources on the web re this topic. Any links would
> help.
>
> Thanks -
> - Lester



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Doug
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-17-2003
> Frame relay is pretty simple really. Just think of it as the same as a point
> to point connection, only you don't need 10 csu/dsu units at your main
> location. You put in a router just the same as you would for a p2p
> connection. Just configure the encapsulation as frame instead of ppp or
> hdlc. These things auto recognize the virtual circuits that the telco sets
> up for you (pvc). So, it is mostly plug and play. A real good way to learn
> about this stuff is to call the telco and tell them you are thinking of a
> Frame Relay solution. They'll come in an give you a real good explanation
> about how it works. And, yes, you can run your own qos on it. But, keep in
> mind when you order the circuits about CIR (commited information rate)- when
> you order a circuit you order circuit speed and CIR. The circuit speed is
> what your maximum throughput is (T1 for example) while the CIR is what they
> promise you will always have available. They tend to oversubscribe their
> services, but not the CIR. So, you need CIR, but it comes at a price.
>


> > I deal with a trucking company that wants to set up a private FR
> > network with 11 branches in US. They want at least T1 speed on all
> > links. Is the best solution to provision dedicated T1s to central
> > office (hub-spoke stuff) and get an Adtran FR switch? Also, do any
> > major carriers provide private FR services? I'm guessing that they
> > would let you own your own switches and give you some sort of qOS on
> > the "public" FR link. I've never set up something like this before and
> > can't find any good sources on the web re this topic. Any links would
> > help.
> >
> > Thanks -
> > - Lester


Another problem you will run into with regards to CIR's, and the other
person elluded to, is the oversubscription/overbooking. You envision
a wagon wheel type setup, and I assume it's 11 branch offices and 1
hub. I've only dealt with SBC for frame and their rules, so your
provider may differ. SBC will only allow you to overbook 300%. So
if your hub has a T1, you can only connect 3 remote T1's at full CIR.
With 11 remote sites, that would require 4 T1's be installed at the
hub/host.

So, it might be a better solution to get a lower grade T3 at the hub
to accomodate the 11 full T1's at the remote locations. It also
provides the ability to add more remote locations without much issue
other than possible having to up the speed on the hub's T3.

If the remote location have a need to communicate directly, then you
get into a whole meshing boon-doggle and the frame goes from looking
lke a wagon wheel to a spider web. Likewise the CIR requirements get
messy. But for sure, with this type of scenario, frame is definitely
the way to go!
 
Reply With Quote
 
Scooby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-17-2003
"Doug" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> > Frame relay is pretty simple really. Just think of it as the same as a

point
> > to point connection, only you don't need 10 csu/dsu units at your main
> > location. You put in a router just the same as you would for a p2p
> > connection. Just configure the encapsulation as frame instead of ppp or
> > hdlc. These things auto recognize the virtual circuits that the telco

sets
> > up for you (pvc). So, it is mostly plug and play. A real good way to

learn
> > about this stuff is to call the telco and tell them you are thinking of

a
> > Frame Relay solution. They'll come in an give you a real good

explanation
> > about how it works. And, yes, you can run your own qos on it. But,

keep in
> > mind when you order the circuits about CIR (commited information rate)-

when
> > you order a circuit you order circuit speed and CIR. The circuit speed

is
> > what your maximum throughput is (T1 for example) while the CIR is what

they
> > promise you will always have available. They tend to oversubscribe

their
> > services, but not the CIR. So, you need CIR, but it comes at a price.
> >

>
> > > I deal with a trucking company that wants to set up a private FR
> > > network with 11 branches in US. They want at least T1 speed on all
> > > links. Is the best solution to provision dedicated T1s to central
> > > office (hub-spoke stuff) and get an Adtran FR switch? Also, do any
> > > major carriers provide private FR services? I'm guessing that they
> > > would let you own your own switches and give you some sort of qOS on
> > > the "public" FR link. I've never set up something like this before and
> > > can't find any good sources on the web re this topic. Any links would
> > > help.
> > >
> > > Thanks -
> > > - Lester

>
> Another problem you will run into with regards to CIR's, and the other
> person elluded to, is the oversubscription/overbooking. You envision
> a wagon wheel type setup, and I assume it's 11 branch offices and 1
> hub. I've only dealt with SBC for frame and their rules, so your
> provider may differ. SBC will only allow you to overbook 300%. So
> if your hub has a T1, you can only connect 3 remote T1's at full CIR.
> With 11 remote sites, that would require 4 T1's be installed at the
> hub/host.
>
> So, it might be a better solution to get a lower grade T3 at the hub
> to accomodate the 11 full T1's at the remote locations. It also
> provides the ability to add more remote locations without much issue
> other than possible having to up the speed on the hub's T3.
>
> If the remote location have a need to communicate directly, then you
> get into a whole meshing boon-doggle and the frame goes from looking
> lke a wagon wheel to a spider web. Likewise the CIR requirements get
> messy. But for sure, with this type of scenario, frame is definitely
> the way to go!


Now, that rule makes no sense at all. Certainly, under most circumstances,
you don't want to pay full CIR for 11 remote sites back to a single T1. It
generally does not make good networking practice. But, I still can't see
why SBC would restrict you from doing so. Let's say that you have all 11
sites have no traffic 98% of the time. But, when they need it, they need to
have it available and placing more T1's at thost location would just be an
expesive solution for something you don't need.

I do think SBC has the right idea with the oversubcription thoughts - just
not forcing their customers to live by them. The only reason I think they
could have for doing so is that they have fought too many loosing battles
with customers and trying to convince them they are getting full CIR, but
the customer's own logjam at the hub is causing a problem. Then you just
get an unhappy customer with bad publicity while providing the customer
exactly what he asked for.






 
Reply With Quote
 
Doug
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-17-2003
> > Another problem you will run into with regards to CIR's, and the other
> > person elluded to, is the oversubscription/overbooking. You envision
> > a wagon wheel type setup, and I assume it's 11 branch offices and 1
> > hub. I've only dealt with SBC for frame and their rules, so your
> > provider may differ. SBC will only allow you to overbook 300%. So
> > if your hub has a T1, you can only connect 3 remote T1's at full CIR.
> > With 11 remote sites, that would require 4 T1's be installed at the
> > hub/host.
> >
> > So, it might be a better solution to get a lower grade T3 at the hub
> > to accomodate the 11 full T1's at the remote locations. It also
> > provides the ability to add more remote locations without much issue
> > other than possible having to up the speed on the hub's T3.
> >
> > If the remote location have a need to communicate directly, then you
> > get into a whole meshing boon-doggle and the frame goes from looking
> > lke a wagon wheel to a spider web. Likewise the CIR requirements get
> > messy. But for sure, with this type of scenario, frame is definitely
> > the way to go!

>
> Now, that rule makes no sense at all. Certainly, under most circumstances,
> you don't want to pay full CIR for 11 remote sites back to a single T1. It
> generally does not make good networking practice. But, I still can't see
> why SBC would restrict you from doing so. Let's say that you have all 11
> sites have no traffic 98% of the time. But, when they need it, they need to
> have it available and placing more T1's at thost location would just be an
> expesive solution for something you don't need.
>
> I do think SBC has the right idea with the oversubcription thoughts - just
> not forcing their customers to live by them. The only reason I think they
> could have for doing so is that they have fought too many loosing battles
> with customers and trying to convince them they are getting full CIR, but
> the customer's own logjam at the hub is causing a problem. Then you just
> get an unhappy customer with bad publicity while providing the customer
> exactly what he asked for.


Well, you could put the CIR's in the dirt with high bursts. You CAN
have 11 T1's into 11, but the 11 would have to have CIR's of about
512k with 1M bursts. But as you said, I don't think Lester (the
original poster) would like the results... A fractional T3/DS3 on
the host end would work best.....
 
Reply With Quote
 
xlate101@yahoo.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2003
It looks like the owners don't want to go with external FR carriers.
Back to my original "private" design. Does terminating 11 T1s at a
central location make sense? I was thinking that if I have these lines
in place, I can just route among the sites. What will FR do for me?
Maybe stupid question but I'm no CCIE (yet).
Thanks
Lester
 
Reply With Quote
 
Scooby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2003
Lester,

Not sure what your owners have against Frame. But, to answer your
question... You really need to evaluate equipment costs, circuit costs and
reasons for wanting the 11 T1's vs. the Frame before saying if it makes
sense. In todays world, 11 T1's make sense less and less. If those 11
sites are far away, p2p will become VERY expensive. If you can get a p2p T1
for the same cost that the frame drop would cost, sure go for it. Seriously
take a good hard look at MPLS and metro ethernet as well - you may find
there is a good solution for you. I actually see my frame relay going away
in the next couple years as I migrate to other options.

Did the owners state why they don't want a FR network?

Jim


<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
> It looks like the owners don't want to go with external FR carriers.
> Back to my original "private" design. Does terminating 11 T1s at a
> central location make sense? I was thinking that if I have these lines
> in place, I can just route among the sites. What will FR do for me?
> Maybe stupid question but I'm no CCIE (yet).
> Thanks
> Lester



 
Reply With Quote
 
xlate101@yahoo.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2003
> Did the owners state why they don't want a FR network?
>

Some other architect told them that private FR will be better for
security and owing their own equipment will make them more self
sufficient. I know they have $$ to blow but just want to make sure
that the final implementation does not have any major design flaws.
Any recommendations on switching gear that is best for this design? 11
sites terminated in one location. I only know Adtran line.
Thangs
Lester
 
Reply With Quote
 
Scooby
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-18-2003
Okay, now I'm really confused... If they are going to the trouble of
terminating 11 T1's in one location - then why even bother with Frame Relay?
Frame Relay is supposed to keep from having the need to do just that with a
second bonus of not being distance sensitve like p2p T1's are. Frame Relay
is really just a bunch of p2p T1's into the telco's equipment. But, they
have different Frame Switches in different CO's, which is why you don't have
to pay the distance charge all the way back to the host.

I guess if that was me setting it up and they wanted all the p2p T1's then
I'd just get a router big enough to handle the expected traffic and use
internal CSU/DSU cards. Adtran is CSU/DSU's. You can use them if you
decide to use serial ports in the router instead of internal CSU/DSU units.



<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) om...
> > Did the owners state why they don't want a FR network?
> >

> Some other architect told them that private FR will be better for
> security and owing their own equipment will make them more self
> sufficient. I know they have $$ to blow but just want to make sure
> that the final implementation does not have any major design flaws.
> Any recommendations on switching gear that is best for this design? 11
> sites terminated in one location. I only know Adtran line.
> Thangs
> Lester



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dhcp Relay Agent And Acl On Sw 3750, DHCP Relay Agent and ACL on Sw 3750 Vimokh Cisco 3 09-06-2006 02:16 AM
2600XM, Frame Relay, and High CPU Utilization Donald Zelenak Jr. Cisco 5 12-06-2003 01:18 AM
ip over frame relay harry Cisco 1 11-28-2003 04:56 PM
frame relay traffic shaping drops pvc occasionally under light load... wr Cisco 0 11-12-2003 09:44 AM
Cable Modem / FT1 Frame Relay hybrid coalition problem Jose E. Calderon Cisco 0 10-23-2003 10:52 AM



Advertisments