Advise on MPLS Providor

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by sillz, Mar 26, 2008.

  1. sillz

    sillz Guest

    Greeting,

    I'm wondering if anyone can speak about their experiences with the
    following vendors. We are in the discovery phase for searching for a
    vendor to provide a private MPLS network supplying throttled service
    up to DS3 point-to-point for 2 offices. 3 much smaller offices would
    be connected to the cloud over T1.

    We've been speaking to Verizon, Qwest and ATT.

    We're interested in the managed router services.

    Each providor tells us that the other vendors do not actually own
    their own private network. The also indicate that the other vendors
    can't possibly give us the SLA that they can provide. In some cases
    it's 38 ms for latency. We've heard 75 ms coast to coast is more
    reasonable.

    We would maintain our existing internet connections, and we would not
    be using the providor's gateway for remote access to the network and
    web services, etc.

    We would build this with the possibility of adding VoIP later, so
    we're interest in the COS as well.

    Does anyone have specific experiences with these providors in an MPLS
    network configuration? What about their managed services? Anyone
    doing VoIP with these providors using COS? Any gotchas we should be
    looking out for?

    Any thoughts would be helpful.

    Thanks!

    Beth
     
    sillz, Mar 26, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. sillz <> writes:
    >I'm wondering if anyone can speak about their experiences with the
    >following vendors. We are in the discovery phase for searching for a
    >vendor to provide a private MPLS network supplying throttled service
    >up to DS3 point-to-point for 2 offices. 3 much smaller offices would
    >be connected to the cloud over T1.


    >We've been speaking to Verizon, Qwest and ATT.


    >We're interested in the managed router services.


    >Each providor tells us that the other vendors do not actually own
    >their own private network. The also indicate that the other vendors
    >can't possibly give us the SLA that they can provide. In some cases
    >it's 38 ms for latency. We've heard 75 ms coast to coast is more
    >reasonable.



    While I haven't shopped for that particular service from these
    providers, I think its funny that they each can't identify the other top-5
    Tier-1 providers in their market. All of them own their own network,
    and can provide SLA at whatever level coast-to-coast on their network.
    (The other two I'd put in the top-5 are Level-3 and Sprint, couldn't
    give you an ordering though, although wouldn't surprise me to have
    Level-3 not own all its own fiber).

    All of them are pretty decent overall.

    The main downside I have with AT&T is with their ticketing system. It
    sucks bigtime. If there's a problem, its a pain to get through.
    Otherwise, their network has been reliable in the past, although I'm
    not using them now for IPv4 transit.

    VZ is pretty solid all around.

    The only problems I've had with Qwest wouldn't affect you for
    this. Mostly overloaded peering points (hard to say who's at fault for
    that, could very well be their peers) getting onto other networks.
    Otherwise Qwest has been pretty solid too.

    Not sure if that helps you at all.
     
    Doug McIntyre, Mar 26, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. sillz

    sillz Guest

    On Mar 26, 1:00 pm, Doug McIntyre <> wrote:
    > sillz <> writes:
    > >I'm wondering if anyone can speak about their experiences with the
    > >following vendors. We are in the discovery phase for searching for a
    > >vendor to provide a private MPLS network supplying throttled service
    > >up to DS3 point-to-point for 2 offices. 3 much smaller offices would
    > >be connected to the cloud over T1.
    > >We've been speaking to Verizon, Qwest and ATT.
    > >We're interested in the managed router services.
    > >Each providor tells us that the other vendors do not actually own
    > >their own private network. The also indicate that the other vendors
    > >can't possibly give us the SLA that they can provide. In some cases
    > >it's 38 ms for latency. We've heard 75 ms coast to coast is more
    > >reasonable.

    >
    > While I haven't shopped for that particular service from these
    > providers, I think its funny that they each can't identify the other top-5
    > Tier-1 providers in their market. All of them own their own network,
    > and can provide SLA at whatever level coast-to-coast on their network.
    > (The other two I'd put in the top-5 are Level-3 and Sprint, couldn't
    > give you an ordering though, although wouldn't surprise me to have
    > Level-3 not own all its own fiber).
    >
    > All of them are pretty decent overall.
    >
    > The main downside I have with AT&T is with their ticketing system. It
    > sucks bigtime. If there's a problem, its a pain to get through.
    > Otherwise, their network has been reliable in the past, although I'm
    > not using them now for IPv4 transit.
    >
    > VZ is pretty solid all around.
    >
    > The only problems I've had with Qwest wouldn't affect you for
    > this. Mostly overloaded peering points (hard to say who's at fault for
    > that, could very well be their peers) getting onto other networks.
    > Otherwise Qwest has been pretty solid too.
    >
    > Not sure if that helps you at all.


    That does help. I've heard similar things about ATT's support system.
    At this point the decision might come down to "value added" options.
    We use Qwest for our internet connection. There's been no downtime,
    and I like their customer service.

    Does anyone have specific experience with ATT, Verizon or Qwest as
    MPLS providers?
     
    sillz, Mar 27, 2008
    #3
  4. sillz wrote:
    > On Mar 26, 1:00 pm, Doug McIntyre <> wrote:
    >> sillz <> writes:
    >>> I'm wondering if anyone can speak about their experiences with the
    >>> following vendors. We are in the discovery phase for searching for a
    >>> vendor to provide a private MPLS network supplying throttled service
    >>> up to DS3 point-to-point for 2 offices. 3 much smaller offices would
    >>> be connected to the cloud over T1.
    >>> We've been speaking to Verizon, Qwest and ATT.
    >>> We're interested in the managed router services.
    >>> Each providor tells us that the other vendors do not actually own
    >>> their own private network. The also indicate that the other vendors
    >>> can't possibly give us the SLA that they can provide. In some cases
    >>> it's 38 ms for latency. We've heard 75 ms coast to coast is more
    >>> reasonable.


    > That does help. I've heard similar things about ATT's support system.
    > At this point the decision might come down to "value added" options.
    > We use Qwest for our internet connection. There's been no downtime,
    > and I like their customer service.
    >
    > Does anyone have specific experience with ATT, Verizon or Qwest as
    > MPLS providers?


    I have some experience with ATT. I also were involved in a couple of RFP
    for MPLS networks. While I see a lot of time being spent on comparing
    SLA and trying to make it apples-to-apples, I'd make an argument that
    SLA doesn't really matter.
    Also VoIP is most likely to work just fine on MPLS from any of those
    carriers (as long as you order priority class of service).

    What will affect performance of your new MPLS based WAN is traffic flow
    matrix and the way particular carrier does egress de-queuing. Since you
    mentioned that you are going to have 2 offices connected to MPLS via DS3
    links and the rest via T1, my guess is you have regular hub-and-spokes
    setup. In that scenario egress de-queuing mechanism is most important
    thing - it will affect user experience in all your remote offices. Ones
    with DS3 links most likely will be fine.

    That being said - ATT is using 4 FIFO queues on egress (could be 6 right
    now, they were talking about it). Don't be confused when they say they
    do CBWFQ - while those 4 queues are weighted and such, they are still
    FIFO. One is used for voice traffic, another two for latency sensitive
    data and last one for the rest. Problem - there is no WFQ inside of
    their best effort class. So huge data transfer between systems with good
    TCP stack has potential to kill everything else there. Two classes for
    latency sensitive work as advertised if you can figure out how to avoid
    oversubscribing them - not easy task since you have any-to-any
    connectivity. As a result - every time link utilization hit 80%+ latency
    goes up and every delay sensitive protocol suffers.

    Regards,
    Andrey.
     
    Andrey Tarasov, Mar 27, 2008
    #4
  5. sillz

    sillz Guest

    On Mar 27, 3:34 pm, Andrey Tarasov <> wrote:
    > sillz wrote:
    > > On Mar 26, 1:00 pm, Doug McIntyre <> wrote:
    > >> sillz <> writes:
    > >>> I'm wondering if anyone can speak about their experiences with the
    > >>> following vendors. We are in the discovery phase for searching for a
    > >>> vendor to provide a private MPLS network supplying throttled service
    > >>> up to DS3 point-to-point for 2 offices. 3 much smaller offices would
    > >>> be connected to the cloud over T1.
    > >>> We've been speaking to Verizon, Qwest and ATT.
    > >>> We're interested in the managed router services.
    > >>> Each providor tells us that the other vendors do not actually own
    > >>> their own private network. The also indicate that the other vendors
    > >>> can't possibly give us the SLA that they can provide. In some cases
    > >>> it's 38 ms for latency. We've heard 75 ms coast to coast is more
    > >>> reasonable.

    > > That does help. I've heard similar things about ATT's support system.
    > > At this point the decision might come down to "value added" options.
    > > We use Qwest for our internet connection. There's been no downtime,
    > > and I like their customer service.

    >
    > > Does anyone have specific experience with ATT, Verizon or Qwest as
    > > MPLS providers?

    >
    > I have some experience with ATT. I also were involved in a couple of RFP
    > for MPLS networks. While I see a lot of time being spent on comparing
    > SLA and trying to make it apples-to-apples, I'd make an argument that
    > SLA doesn't really matter.
    > Also VoIP is most likely to work just fine on MPLS from any of those
    > carriers (as long as you order priority class of service).
    >
    > What will affect performance of your new MPLS based WAN is traffic flow
    > matrix and the way particular carrier does egress de-queuing. Since you
    > mentioned that you are going to have 2 offices connected to MPLS via DS3
    > links and the rest via T1, my guess is you have regular hub-and-spokes
    > setup. In that scenario egress de-queuing mechanism is most important
    > thing - it will affect user experience in all your remote offices. Ones
    > with DS3 links most likely will be fine.
    >
    > That being said - ATT is using 4 FIFO queues on egress (could be 6 right
    > now, they were talking about it). Don't be confused when they say they
    > do CBWFQ - while those 4 queues are weighted and such, they are still
    > FIFO. One is used for voice traffic, another two for latency sensitive
    > data and last one for the rest. Problem - there is no WFQ inside of
    > their best effort class. So huge data transfer between systems with good
    > TCP stack has potential to kill everything else there. Two classes for
    > latency sensitive work as advertised if you can figure out how to avoid
    > oversubscribing them - not easy task since you have any-to-any
    > connectivity. As a result - every time link utilization hit 80%+ latency
    > goes up and every delay sensitive protocol suffers.
    >
    > Regards,
    > Andrey.


    Thanks ... This is very helpful information. Yes, we're
    straightforward hub and spoke. We won't be pushing voice traffic for
    a while, but we will be doing limited video conferencing. Also, the
    users will be oracle reads and writes from a fat client.
     
    sillz, Mar 27, 2008
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Craig Whitmore

    VRF/MPLS Problem

    Craig Whitmore, Jul 15, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    3,043
    Craig Whitmore
    Jul 15, 2003
  2. Herbert Haas
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    651
    Herbert Haas
    Jan 9, 2004
  3. Jimmi
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    935
    Jimmi
    Aug 16, 2005
  4. ttripp
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    3,794
    Ranak
    Nov 12, 2007
  5. Peter Danes
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    4,956
    Peter Danes
    Sep 22, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page