Re: OT:MPLS Across US

Yeah, I hear you. What is nice about a huge player like an AT&T is that
they are ALMOST everywhere, and their MPLS VPN design is already based on a
regional model. Without doing anything special, I already have regional
default routing and things in place just because of the way their global
network is designed. Hooking into another telco in places they don't have a
POP is easier for them too. They already had agreements in place with CT
and many other customers doing the same thing.

Also don't expect any overly useful information from the carrier...I had to
basically figure out their network design by playing around and asking a
lot of questions to the right people. Never trust sales guys and have
conference calls with the right technical people before you sign anything :
)

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Dennis Worth <dennis.worth_at_gmail.com>wrote:

> Joe,
>
> Thanks for that heads up . These are things that always concern me. Level
> 3 is the SP I am looking to at this time, but the draw back I see is if you
> go with a different carrier all together than that means another POP into
> headquarters. Don't want to have 3 or 4 MPLS cloud POPS based of Region,
> that could be torture.
>
> thanks,
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Joe Astorino <joeastorino1982_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> My recent experiences have been with AT&T. They provide MPLS L3 VPN
>> services across the USA and many many other countries, and offer a variety
>> of QoS options. Specifically, they offer a 4 queue and 6 queue system,
>> with a variety of different queueing options depending on what you want to
>> do. NOW...the company I implemented this for, also does business in China
>> and Hong Kong where AT&T could not get me a circuit.
>>
>> AT&T works with China Telecom in that situation. Basically, there is an
>> ISP to ISP connection (redundant connections actually and you get to pick
>> the IP addressing on that link as it must use inter-AS MPLS option A).
>> That portion of it all works fine, but the QoS is where it sucks. China
>> Telecom in this situation only supports currently a 4 queue system. AT&T
>> supports either 4 or 6 ...so if you actually wanted to use 6 queues, you
>> are kind of stuck unless you want to do a bunch of manual tedious
>> remarkings. Because of this, I implemented a 4 queue system across the
>> board.
>>
>> Make sure you are aware of all these things before you pull the trigger
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Ronnie Angello <
>> ronnie.angello_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My experience in the past with an in-country/continental WAN was with
>>> Verizon Business. We had nearly 1500 sites across the US, and their PIP
>>> service was available everywhere. Canada was a different story, and I
>>> agree that it took a bit of effort to work with the other provider,
>>> specifically around provisioning and QoS... Don't expect it to be inline
>>> with your standard configurations.
>>>
>>> I would imagine that AT&T and Sprint would have the same capabilities
>>> domestically, but I'm not exactly sure.
>>>
>>> Ronnie
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Dennis Worth <dennis.worth_at_gmail.com
>>> >wrote:
>>>
>>> > Group,
>>> >
>>> > I have an OT ? for you. Which carriers do MPLS (single carrier) across
>>> the
>>> > US(coast to coast)? also what are the impacts today with having a
>>> > compounded based MPLS with a carrier handing off to another carrier
>>> with
>>> > regards to provisioning and QOS?
>>> >
>>> > websites with info would be great and or personal experiences.
>>> >
>>> > Thank you all!
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Dennis Worth
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________________________________
>>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Joe Astorino
>> CCIE #24347
>> http://astorinonetworks.com
>>
>> "He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Dennis Worth
>
>
>
>

-- 
Regards,
Joe Astorino
CCIE #24347
http://astorinonetworks.com
"He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net