From: Brent D. Stewart, CCSI (brent.stewart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Apr 18 2001 - 12:25:08 GMT-3
In my opinion -
One reason for having a separate PVC would be to implement a crude form of
QoS. Send all VoIP packets down this PVC and that way they get at least x
bandwidth. You get the idea. I think they could adequately replicate this
on the router and use queuing, etc. So the answer is yes, convert them to
simplex, but at the cost of complexity. Yes, simulate this in a lab to make
sure you know what you are doing. If you convert make sure you have enough
bandwidth. 1+1 equals _at least_ 2. I'm sure the group could expand on this
thought if you told us more about the intended use.
Another reason for having a separate PVC would be for redundancy, but I
don't see the benefit in having two PVCs through the same carrier, going
through the same CO, traveling within the same bundle across the same
telephone poles. Not very redundant, so I assume that is not the intended
purpose.
Regards,
Brent Stewart
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Dorroh, Hunter
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 10:07 AM
To: Cisco Ccie - HD
Subject: Farme-Relay Duplex - OT
I have a customer that is using Qwest for their frame relay network and they
are paying additional money for a duplex PVC. Would they loose much if any
performance by switching to a simplex connection? Is this something I can
simulate and test using my lab to prove to them it is either necessary or
unnecessary?
Thanks,
Hunter
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:29:49 GMT-3