From: Ronnie Angello (ronnie.angello@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Jan 16 2009 - 14:00:46 ARST
Since we're hypothetically speaking here, I would think that it would
still be frame for the attachment circuit, so you would still have to
deal with FR encapsulation, DLCIs, LMI, etc.
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Felix Nkansah <felixnkansah@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> There arose some rumors in time past about Cisco possibly replacing FR in
> the r&s lab with mpls sooner or later.
>
> The thought of this typically sent shivers through the spines of most r&s
> candidates.
>
> IMHO, I believe that would make the r&s lab easier than it is with FR unless
> it is offset by other sections.
>
> Candidates configuring mpls CEs would literally do nothing than assign IP
> addresses to the interfaces and introduce them to the IGP. Even my grandma
> can do that!
>
> As the mpls core setup is usually transparent to the end-CEs, candidates
> would no longer have to worry about encapsulations, lmi, dlci, frts and the
> various nuances associated with the FR technology.
>
> Unless of course cisco expects r&s candidates to get their hands wet with
> some real mpls technology configurations which typically require intimacy
> with the Ps and PEs. I doubt that would be the case though. That would be SP
> stuff.
>
> Anyway, I just felt like blogging on GS :-) :-)
>
> Felix
> ccie r&s, security
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-- Ronald Angello CCIE #17846Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 01 2009 - 09:43:38 ARST