[AusNOG] Cisco Switch recommendations for a small ISP

[Adam Nock]

Id be a tiny bit careful there.

We've had equipment from a couple of vendors which should have been doing completely non-invasive switching, yet either would not transit or would remove the lower vlan tag's off stacked frames.

As always, Best to test :)

From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Lincoln Dale
Sent: Wednesday, 28 March 2012 1:24 PM
To: James Mcintosh
Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Cisco Switch recommendations for a small ISP

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 4:11 PM, James Mcintosh <james.mcintosh at rocketmail.com<mailto:james.mcintosh at rocketmail.com>> wrote:
Can anyone comment on their experience with either of these or differences they've found?

neither likely meets all your requirements around q-in-q, although thats a bit of a generic requirement, any L2 switch can transport Q-in-Q as they are just L2 frames. Ability to be intelligent about encap/decap/stacking is another.....


cheers,

lincoln.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20120328/aefd459f/attachment.html>