Mailing List Archive

Depends on your market. If your anticipated user base is going to use a
lot of bandwidth, then you'll quickly exhaust the 7200 series, whereas
the ASR-X series can scale.

If you use a 7200, be prepared for it to fall over whenever a single
user is hit by small DDoS attack. ASR-X's have handled these well
enough in my experience.

If you have space/power constraints, you can support more with a 1 or
2RU ASR-X than a rack full of 7200's.

QoS support scales better on the ASR-X series.

Finally, TAC.

-- Stephen

On 2017-02-11 3:03 PM, Bruce Technical wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or
> ASR1002-x are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses +
> 500 Sessions.
>
> We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR
> can't do for example?
>
> Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Bruce
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba

On Sat, 11 Feb 2017, Bruce Technical wrote:

> Hi,
> We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or ASR1002-x are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses
> + 500 Sessions.
>
> We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR can't do for example?
>
> Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.

What type/speed interface are you looking at using to connect to the telco
or whoever's DSL you're looking at reselling? Back when I was involved in
this, it was common to use ATM, either T1, NxT1, or T3, and we did this
with 3640 or 7206VXR. But this was back when DSL was generally 1.5Mx256k.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route
| therefore you are
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba

Hi,

We use a 7204vxr with an NPE-G2 as an LNS, Carrier sends sessions from their LAC to us via L2TP tunnel.

Use it more for FTTx than DSL, have about 30 DSL sessions and 400 FTTX connections, varying fom 12/1 to 100/40. Pretty impressed with the NPE-G2, we average about 30-40% CPU with those connections, no extra cards in device, just using standard 3 gigabit ports on the NPE, one for inbound sessions, one for internet and one for radius.

In the process of putting in an ASR1004 with an ESP40 in a couple of weeks, a lot more coin than the 7204, but consolidating a bit and we do a lot of L2 Fibre connections to business customers, biggest reason is to get netflow for new data retention laws.

Not being a Cisco expert by any means, moving from a switch platform to a router platform has been a huge learning curve!

From: cisco-bba [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Technical
Sent: Sunday, 12 February 2017 7:03 AM
To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
Subject: [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)

Hi,

We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or ASR1002-x are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500 Sessions.

We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR can't do for example?

Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.


Thanks,
Bruce

Hi Nathan,

Thanks for the feedback.

1- ASR1001-x need IP Advance licenses ($6k) and sessions licens (500 for
$5k and 4500 more for another $5k+). Do you need those for your setup?

2- Are there any licenses you have to buy for the 7204vxr series to be able
to do LNS/LAC or VRF and L2TP?

Side note: There are some Radius challenges apparently that the new ASR
will throw your way.

Cheers,

On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> We use a 7204vxr with an NPE-G2 as an LNS, Carrier sends sessions from
> their LAC to us via L2TP tunnel.
>
>
>
> Use it more for FTTx than DSL, have about 30 DSL sessions and 400 FTTX
> connections, varying fom 12/1 to 100/40. Pretty impressed with the NPE-G2,
> we average about 30-40% CPU with those connections, no extra cards in
> device, just using standard 3 gigabit ports on the NPE, one for inbound
> sessions, one for internet and one for radius.
>
>
>
> In the process of putting in an ASR1004 with an ESP40 in a couple of
> weeks, a lot more coin than the 7204, but consolidating a bit and we do a
> lot of L2 Fibre connections to business customers, biggest reason is to get
> netflow for new data retention laws.
>
>
>
> Not being a Cisco expert by any means, moving from a switch platform to a
> router platform has been a huge learning curve!
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-bba [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Bruce Technical
> *Sent:* Sunday, 12 February 2017 7:03 AM
> *To:* cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or
> ASR1002-x are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500
> Sessions.
>
>
>
> We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR
> can't do for example?
>
>
>
> Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bruce
>

Hi Bruce,

Yes we got Advanced IP Enterprise?? + BB license (500 sessions), can increase later if necessary, I think without them the commands do nothing on a ASR1001-x, but you can activate evaluation licenses which turn to RTU after 30 days, still honour based but TAC won’t help for issues without them.

7204vxr I just got ADV IP Enterprise and it did everything I needed, they didn’t do they charge for each feature option for them (or I just didn’t know about it), just make sure you get a NPE-G2 and not one of the earlier engines. Half the sessions come in as direct PPPOE and the rest come in over L2TP tunnels. We also do NAT for about 60% of the sessions too which increases the CPU usage.

I remember reading about the radius challenges, but I don’t think we used those features, apart from the config for the radius being in a slightly different way it was pretty easy to setup. I would think with just DSL you could easily do 1k+ sessions on the 7204vxr without stretching it, if you are expecting quick growth above that I would look at the ASR, hard for me to guess though because not that many DSL connections. Price difference is huge, here 2nd hand ASR1004, ESP40, RP2, SIP40, 10gbit module and 3 x 8 x 1gbit module + licenses and smartnet came out at about 50k.. where we got the 7204vxr about 4-5 years ago for 5k.

Still think that is fair, 7204vxr limited to 3gbit max using all ports, and ESP40 will do 40gbit + a whole heap of other stuff.

From: Bruce Technical [mailto:brucetechnical@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, 12 February 2017 10:36 AM
To: Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com>
Cc: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)

Hi Nathan,

Thanks for the feedback.

1- ASR1001-x need IP Advance licenses ($6k) and sessions licens (500 for $5k and 4500 more for another $5k+). Do you need those for your setup?

2- Are there any licenses you have to buy for the 7204vxr series to be able to do LNS/LAC or VRF and L2TP?

Side note: There are some Radius challenges apparently that the new ASR will throw your way.

Cheers,

On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com<mailto:nathandownes@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,

We use a 7204vxr with an NPE-G2 as an LNS, Carrier sends sessions from their LAC to us via L2TP tunnel.

Use it more for FTTx than DSL, have about 30 DSL sessions and 400 FTTX connections, varying fom 12/1 to 100/40. Pretty impressed with the NPE-G2, we average about 30-40% CPU with those connections, no extra cards in device, just using standard 3 gigabit ports on the NPE, one for inbound sessions, one for internet and one for radius.

In the process of putting in an ASR1004 with an ESP40 in a couple of weeks, a lot more coin than the 7204, but consolidating a bit and we do a lot of L2 Fibre connections to business customers, biggest reason is to get netflow for new data retention laws.

Not being a Cisco expert by any means, moving from a switch platform to a router platform has been a huge learning curve!

From: cisco-bba [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net>] On Behalf Of Bruce Technical
Sent: Sunday, 12 February 2017 7:03 AM
To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)

Hi,

We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or ASR1002-x are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500 Sessions.

We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR can't do for example?

Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.


Thanks,
Bruce

As per a lot of other responses, the main difference is throughput. If your requirements are low, then you can still get away with the 7200 for a while. Spares are cheap (2nd hand) make sure you have some on hand.


From: Bruce Technical <brucetechnical@gmail.com>
To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
Sent: Sunday, 12 February 2017, 6:03
Subject: [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)

Hi,
We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or ASR1002-x are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500 Sessions.
We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR can't do for example?
Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.

Thanks,Bruce
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba

Hi Nathan,

*"*but you can activate evaluation licenses which turn to RTU after 30
days, still honour based but TAC won’t help for issues without them." <<<
You mean we have to purchase licenses after 30 days or do you mean features
will work without purchase but there won't be any TAC support? I am
wondering if Cisco even sells those licenses anymore and if they are not
transferable this means an item from ebay won't do the job.

"Half the sessions come in as direct PPPOE and the rest come in over L2TP
tunnels. " <<< I am planning for NPE-G2 as everyone is suggesting it but
why would half the session come in as direct PPPoE and rest over L2TP? is
that how this work or just your infrastructure?

"We also do NAT for about 60% of the sessions too which increases the CPU
usage." <<< Why do you do NAT? Don't your clients get their own public IP
address without any NATing involved? Or is this some sort of inbound
traffic shaping?

"Still think that is fair, 7204vxr limited to 3gbit max using all ports,
and ESP40 will do 40gbit + a whole heap of other stuff. " <<< Given there
is only 3 usable ports on NPE-G2 and no other NPE modules available the
only option for us is to stack when we grow or move to ASR1001-x when price
makes sense. We get a 1gbps fiber coming to us from ISP so that should be
just fine but as Harald mentioned 7204vxr+NPE-G2 realistically does up to
500mbps with this setup so we might have to soon stack. Can we not have a
network design like this without worrying if our Service Provider supports
multiple LNS IPs on our end:

* Service Provider*
* |*
* -----some managed switch -----*
* | |
|*
* 7204vxr-A 7204vxr-B 7204vxr-C*

And we ask the switch to somehow load balance things?

Regards,


On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 8:10 PM, Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Bruce,
>
>
>
> Yes we got Advanced IP Enterprise?? + BB license (500 sessions), can
> increase later if necessary, I think without them the commands do nothing
> on a ASR1001-x, but you can activate evaluation licenses which turn to RTU
> after 30 days, still honour based but TAC won’t help for issues without
> them.
>
>
>
> 7204vxr I just got ADV IP Enterprise and it did everything I needed, they
> didn’t do they charge for each feature option for them (or I just didn’t
> know about it), just make sure you get a NPE-G2 and not one of the earlier
> engines. Half the sessions come in as direct PPPOE and the rest come in
> over L2TP tunnels. We also do NAT for about 60% of the sessions too which
> increases the CPU usage.
>
>
>
> I remember reading about the radius challenges, but I don’t think we used
> those features, apart from the config for the radius being in a slightly
> different way it was pretty easy to setup. I would think with just DSL
> you could easily do 1k+ sessions on the 7204vxr without stretching it, if
> you are expecting quick growth above that I would look at the ASR, hard for
> me to guess though because not that many DSL connections. Price difference
> is huge, here 2nd hand ASR1004, ESP40, RP2, SIP40, 10gbit module and 3 x
> 8 x 1gbit module + licenses and smartnet came out at about 50k.. where we
> got the 7204vxr about 4-5 years ago for 5k.
>
>
>
> Still think that is fair, 7204vxr limited to 3gbit max using all ports,
> and ESP40 will do 40gbit + a whole heap of other stuff.
>
>
>
> *From:* Bruce Technical [mailto:brucetechnical@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, 12 February 2017 10:36 AM
> *To:* Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com>
> *Cc:* cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)
>
>
>
> Hi Nathan,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
>
>
> 1- ASR1001-x need IP Advance licenses ($6k) and sessions licens (500 for
> $5k and 4500 more for another $5k+). Do you need those for your setup?
>
>
>
> 2- Are there any licenses you have to buy for the 7204vxr series to be
> able to do LNS/LAC or VRF and L2TP?
>
>
>
> Side note: There are some Radius challenges apparently that the new ASR
> will throw your way.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We use a 7204vxr with an NPE-G2 as an LNS, Carrier sends sessions from
> their LAC to us via L2TP tunnel.
>
>
>
> Use it more for FTTx than DSL, have about 30 DSL sessions and 400 FTTX
> connections, varying fom 12/1 to 100/40. Pretty impressed with the NPE-G2,
> we average about 30-40% CPU with those connections, no extra cards in
> device, just using standard 3 gigabit ports on the NPE, one for inbound
> sessions, one for internet and one for radius.
>
>
>
> In the process of putting in an ASR1004 with an ESP40 in a couple of
> weeks, a lot more coin than the 7204, but consolidating a bit and we do a
> lot of L2 Fibre connections to business customers, biggest reason is to get
> netflow for new data retention laws.
>
>
>
> Not being a Cisco expert by any means, moving from a switch platform to a
> router platform has been a huge learning curve!
>
>
>
> *From:* cisco-bba [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net] *On Behalf
> Of *Bruce Technical
> *Sent:* Sunday, 12 February 2017 7:03 AM
> *To:* cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or
> ASR1002-x are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500
> Sessions.
>
>
>
> We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR
> can't do for example?
>
>
>
> Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bruce
>
>
>

Hi Harald,

Thanks again for the input.

*"You basically have to ask your provider whether they can send traffic for
@relamA and @relamB to different LNS IP-addresses.*
*If they can, you could use @realmA customers to be terminated at some
cheapo-LNS-device - they only get internet-access - end of story." *<<< I
am grasping the idea of SP sending requests to us to multiple 7204vxr but
what do you mean by @realmA to be terminated to some cheapo LNS device and
only internet access? I thought if we have two realms like
*john@mytelecom-a.com
<http://mytelecom-a.com>* would need the same support as a user we sign up
like *sally**@mytelecom-b.com <http://mytelecom-b.com>*

"And then you could use @realmB customers to be directed to some
cisco/juniper/.. box where you can then add VRF and other options." <<< I
thought VRF is needed regardless (on both realmA or realmB) to keep
customer public IPs on separate virtual routes so they can't sniff each
other packets etc...which means we have to do this regardless. Isn't that
so? is there another solution as well?

"if your vrf customers get IPs from local cisco ip-pools you might even be
able to get vrf2vrf-connectivity by using static routes" <<< We are getting
multiple /24 blocks from our IP Transit provider (which might also be our
same DSLAM service provider) and I thought we talked that those will be in
Radius server and passed on to SP to assign to customer. I am not clear on
this part at all yet.

" I'd suggest in anyway to get two boxes, just in case one breaks or better
have them both terminate your sessions and be redundant always" <<< We
definitely have the budget for two or three boxes of these. Is there any
way to create a HA redundancy using multiple boxes?

Cheers,




On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 8:20 PM, Harald Kapper <hk@kapper.net> wrote:

> Hi
> Actually a „7204vxr“ is just a chassis, the NPE-G2 is what makes things
> work this is basically the cpu + 3xGig-Ethernet + 100Meg-management-port.
> The G2 is the limiting factor, also there is no better NPE available for
> 72xx routers anyways.
>
> You can of course use a switch with a SFP module to terminate your fiber
> access and you very much so should.
>
> The support for multiple router would be needed from your
> broadband-service because:
> They decide which connection they send to your LNS or your multitple LNS
> boxes, at least they should support terminating at two different IPs on
> your end, but maybe they even support more than two l2tp-endpoints, but if
> they support only one IP then you have no way to move sessions from one
> 72xx to another. The more l2tp-endpoint-IPs they support the more LNS
> devices you can run on your end and scale by adding hardware.
>
> Ad) mikrotik - this is simply a box to terminate sessions and hand out
> IPs, vrf is not supported (you could do some hacks, but don't).
> Ubiquiti doesn't do plain l2tp-lns as you mentioned yourself, don't do it
> :).
>
> >> 4- I am not exactly sure what you mean here:
> "If you can get multiple endpoints for different realms from your
> broadband-service you might even consider to have one realm to terminate
> internet-traffic only using a cheap mikrotik and use another realm to
> terminate at one or more 72xx for vrf-use." Can you please explain? Our
> provider does allow us to have multiple realms but I am not sure if they
> send this to multiple devices or not. They will give us a 6 strand fiber
> but maybe they will use one strand to terminate AHHSPI.
>
> You basically have to ask your provider whether they can send traffic for
> @relamA and @relamB to different LNS IP-addresses.
> If they can, you could use @realmA customers to be terminated at some
> cheapo-LNS-device - they only get internet-access - end of story.
> And then you could use @realmB customers to be directed to some
> cisco/juniper/.. box where you can then add VRF and other options.
> If your broadband-provider sends @realmB sessions to more than one LNS
> IP-address, you might consider some sane cisco-to-cisco setup to keep the
> vrf users in sync, this can either be achieved by using ospf in each vrf
> between the ciscos or by using bgp-vpnv4 (if you're not fluent in mpls this
> might give you more headache than it's worth for starters), if your vrf
> customers get IPs from local cisco ip-pools you might even be able to get
> vrf2vrf-connectivity by using static routes, but I guess you get the point.
>
> Anyway, for a 100meg starter plan I'd suggest get some NPE-G1 or NPE-G2
> boxes (better G2) and if you're not cisco aware, do lots of reading, you
> can easily feature-overload one box, but if you do well you can scale up to
> several hundreds of users and deliver roughly 500 mbit/s per box without
> lots of worries. I'd suggest in anyway to get two boxes, just in case one
> breaks or better have them both terminate your sessions and be redundant
> always, this way if you have to reboot one box, only roughly 50% of your
> users get disconnected.
>
> If you have no budget, you could even get started using some C2851 boxes,
> but they will be easily maxed out at some 100+ Mbit/s traffic, but you can
> buy them for virtually no money.
>
> Regards
> hk
>
>
>
>
>

From: Bruce Technical [mailto:brucetechnical@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 13 February 2017 6:22 AM
To: Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com>
Cc: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)

Hi Nathan,

"but you can activate evaluation licenses which turn to RTU after 30 days, still honour based but TAC won’t help for issues without them." <<< You mean we have to purchase licenses after 30 days or do you mean features will work without purchase but there won't be any TAC support? I am wondering if Cisco even sells those licenses anymore and if they are not transferable this means an item from ebay won't do the job.

This is for the ASR, not the 7204.

"Half the sessions come in as direct PPPOE and the rest come in over L2TP tunnels. " <<< I am planning for NPE-G2 as everyone is suggesting it but why would half the session come in as direct PPPoE and rest over L2TP? is that how this work or just your infrastructure?

Just the way we do it, 2 providers just send them across a VLAN, one provider across a L2TP tunnel

"We also do NAT for about 60% of the sessions too which increases the CPU usage." <<< Why do you do NAT? Don't your clients get their own public IP address without any NATing involved? Or is this some sort of inbound traffic shaping?

We do a few retirement villages, they don’t need their own public IP, also not easy to get lots of IP’s anymore ?

"Still think that is fair, 7204vxr limited to 3gbit max using all ports, and ESP40 will do 40gbit + a whole heap of other stuff. " <<< Given there is only 3 usable ports on NPE-G2 and no other NPE modules available the only option for us is to stack when we grow or move to ASR1001-x when price makes sense. We get a 1gbps fiber coming to us from ISP so that should be just fine but as Harald mentioned 7204vxr+NPE-G2 realistically does up to 500mbps with this setup so we might have to soon stack. Can we not have a network design like this without worrying if our Service Provider supports multiple LNS IPs on our end:

Service Provider
|
-----some managed switch -----
| | |
7204vxr-A 7204vxr-B 7204vxr-C

And we ask the switch to somehow load balance things?

Never maxxed it out to find out the limits, so Harald is more than likely right ? and as he mentioned we can get provider to send @Realm1 to one LNS IP and @Realm2 to another, that is usually a feature of the LAC as I understand it to decide what LNS the sessions go to, so the “some managed switch” would be a LAC. I have not got to the point this became an issue and I had to solve it so I can’t suggest anything apart from checking provider can do it.

Regards,


On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 8:10 PM, Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com<mailto:nathandownes@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Bruce,

Yes we got Advanced IP Enterprise?? + BB license (500 sessions), can increase later if necessary, I think without them the commands do nothing on a ASR1001-x, but you can activate evaluation licenses which turn to RTU after 30 days, still honour based but TAC won’t help for issues without them.

7204vxr I just got ADV IP Enterprise and it did everything I needed, they didn’t do they charge for each feature option for them (or I just didn’t know about it), just make sure you get a NPE-G2 and not one of the earlier engines. Half the sessions come in as direct PPPOE and the rest come in over L2TP tunnels. We also do NAT for about 60% of the sessions too which increases the CPU usage.

I remember reading about the radius challenges, but I don’t think we used those features, apart from the config for the radius being in a slightly different way it was pretty easy to setup. I would think with just DSL you could easily do 1k+ sessions on the 7204vxr without stretching it, if you are expecting quick growth above that I would look at the ASR, hard for me to guess though because not that many DSL connections. Price difference is huge, here 2nd hand ASR1004, ESP40, RP2, SIP40, 10gbit module and 3 x 8 x 1gbit module + licenses and smartnet came out at about 50k.. where we got the 7204vxr about 4-5 years ago for 5k.

Still think that is fair, 7204vxr limited to 3gbit max using all ports, and ESP40 will do 40gbit + a whole heap of other stuff.

From: Bruce Technical [mailto:brucetechnical@gmail.com<mailto:brucetechnical@gmail.com>]
Sent: Sunday, 12 February 2017 10:36 AM
To: Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com<mailto:nathandownes@hotmail.com>>
Cc: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)

Hi Nathan,

Thanks for the feedback.

1- ASR1001-x need IP Advance licenses ($6k) and sessions licens (500 for $5k and 4500 more for another $5k+). Do you need those for your setup?

2- Are there any licenses you have to buy for the 7204vxr series to be able to do LNS/LAC or VRF and L2TP?

Side note: There are some Radius challenges apparently that the new ASR will throw your way.

Cheers,

On Sat, Feb 11, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Nathan Downes <nathandownes@hotmail.com<mailto:nathandownes@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,

We use a 7204vxr with an NPE-G2 as an LNS, Carrier sends sessions from their LAC to us via L2TP tunnel.

Use it more for FTTx than DSL, have about 30 DSL sessions and 400 FTTX connections, varying fom 12/1 to 100/40. Pretty impressed with the NPE-G2, we average about 30-40% CPU with those connections, no extra cards in device, just using standard 3 gigabit ports on the NPE, one for inbound sessions, one for internet and one for radius.

In the process of putting in an ASR1004 with an ESP40 in a couple of weeks, a lot more coin than the 7204, but consolidating a bit and we do a lot of L2 Fibre connections to business customers, biggest reason is to get netflow for new data retention laws.

Not being a Cisco expert by any means, moving from a switch platform to a router platform has been a huge learning curve!

From: cisco-bba [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net>] On Behalf Of Bruce Technical
Sent: Sunday, 12 February 2017 7:03 AM
To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
Subject: [cisco-bba] 7204VXR vs ASR1001-x (as LNS / provider is LAC)

Hi,

We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or ASR1002-x are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500 Sessions.

We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR can't do for example?

Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.


Thanks,
Bruce

You will not be able to load balance using your switch. In all
probability, your carrier will round-robin between your LNS end-points
and not necessarily in an equal fashion. This can become an issue when
a large portion of your PPPoE sessions reconnect following an outage
inside the carrier network. You may be better served with three LNS'es
rather than two, to account for such events and give you breathing room.


On 2017-02-12 2:21 PM, Bruce Technical wrote:
> And we ask the switch to somehow load balance things?
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba

On 11 February 2017 at 20:03, Bruce Technical <brucetechnical@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or ASR1002-x
> are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500 Sessions.
>
> We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR can't
> do for example?
>
> Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Bruce


Hi Bruce,

I know this is a late response (I've been away and I'm catching upon
emails), but for the sake of the list archives it might help someone
else.

As others have already mentioned the ASR1000 series will scale much
further and so it costs more. For the price of an ASR1001-X (I
wouldn't bother with non-X versions anymore) you can buy several
7206VXRs with NPE-G2 but you won't have TAC support and scaling limits
(only 1G interfaces and stuff like NAT quickly chews up CPU).

> Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.

This is what I would call the basic feature set of an LNS so both ASR
and 7200 series devices provide both functions as well as stuff like
QoS and NAT.

We don't scale our 7200s above 1k sub's. We are an LLU provider but
when it comes to FTTC/VDSL we normally terminate that locally in the
PoP. So if we take a wholesale ADSL and VDSL connection into a central
LNS from a 3rd party supplier we have to be weary that the 7200's on
have 1G interfaces as we can sell bonded ADSL & VDSL over the 3rd
party L2TP tunnels so 1G == 1k sub's is about right in my head.

Someone mention about the RADIUS challenges for ASR's, I have some
notes on example RADIUS configs here:
https://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=avpairs

If you look under: Cisco new style ("ip") VSAs

ASRs need to use these style of VSAs on the virtual access interface.
Further down are the "older" style VSAs however both types are support
on the 7200s with a 15 IOS so initially it did catch us out when
migrating to ASRs but we just did a mass backed update in
Postgres/RADIUS so all accounts use the "newer" style and there all
users could be connected to either a 7200 series or ASR series LNS.

If you're going to deploy an ASR maybe check out these notes I made on
initial limitations and issues we hit:
https://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=asr-ios-xr-lns-config

some of them are resolved now in newer XE versions and I haven't had
time to update the notes but it’s worth double checking in the Cisco
doc's for yourself. For example, we just dropped L2 port-channels in
exchange for multiple 1G layer 3 interfaces and/or 10G interfaces,
they caused too much trouble with QoS and NetFlow and SNMP monitoring.

You had some queries regarding load balancing across multiple LNS
devices. Assuming you use RADIUS on your side to speak with your 3rd
party provider (I highly recommend this) you can return the IP of all
3 LNS devices (or however many you have) back to the provider for any
user or realm and they should round-robin the session across those LNS
device IPs. You can also adjust the priorities in your RADIUS response
if you want to have un-equal load balancing. Any good 3rd party
provider should support this.

Cheers,
James.
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba

***sending again with reply all and a minor change***
Hi James,

Not late at all. We are deciding this week to go with one ASR-x or multiple
7206vxr.

1- How would couple 7206vxr work together when our ISP is wanting to
connect to LNS first and not Radius?

2- I am asked to pick single or multimode fiber. For 7206vxr which one
should I pick and which is supported?

1000 customers is not bad for the price of a VXR.

Best Regards,

On Mar 6, 2017 4:39 AM, "James Bensley" <jwbensley@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 11 February 2017 at 20:03, Bruce Technical <brucetechnical@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or
> ASR1002-x
> > are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500
> Sessions.
> >
> > We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR
> can't
> > do for example?
> >
> > Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bruce
>
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> I know this is a late response (I've been away and I'm catching upon
> emails), but for the sake of the list archives it might help someone
> else.
>
> As others have already mentioned the ASR1000 series will scale much
> further and so it costs more. For the price of an ASR1001-X (I
> wouldn't bother with non-X versions anymore) you can buy several
> 7206VXRs with NPE-G2 but you won't have TAC support and scaling limits
> (only 1G interfaces and stuff like NAT quickly chews up CPU).
>
> > Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.
>
> This is what I would call the basic feature set of an LNS so both ASR
> and 7200 series devices provide both functions as well as stuff like
> QoS and NAT.
>
> We don't scale our 7200s above 1k sub's. We are an LLU provider but
> when it comes to FTTC/VDSL we normally terminate that locally in the
> PoP. So if we take a wholesale ADSL and VDSL connection into a central
> LNS from a 3rd party supplier we have to be weary that the 7200's on
> have 1G interfaces as we can sell bonded ADSL & VDSL over the 3rd
> party L2TP tunnels so 1G == 1k sub's is about right in my head.
>
> Someone mention about the RADIUS challenges for ASR's, I have some
> notes on example RADIUS configs here:
> https://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=avpairs
>
> If you look under: Cisco new style ("ip") VSAs
>
> ASRs need to use these style of VSAs on the virtual access interface.
> Further down are the "older" style VSAs however both types are support
> on the 7200s with a 15 IOS so initially it did catch us out when
> migrating to ASRs but we just did a mass backed update in
> Postgres/RADIUS so all accounts use the "newer" style and there all
> users could be connected to either a 7200 series or ASR series LNS.
>
> If you're going to deploy an ASR maybe check out these notes I made on
> initial limitations and issues we hit:
> https://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=asr-ios-xr-lns-config
>
> some of them are resolved now in newer XE versions and I haven't had
> time to update the notes but it’s worth double checking in the Cisco
> doc's for yourself. For example, we just dropped L2 port-channels in
> exchange for multiple 1G layer 3 interfaces and/or 10G interfaces,
> they caused too much trouble with QoS and NetFlow and SNMP monitoring.
>
> You had some queries regarding load balancing across multiple LNS
> devices. Assuming you use RADIUS on your side to speak with your 3rd
> party provider (I highly recommend this) you can return the IP of all
> 3 LNS devices (or however many you have) back to the provider for any
> user or realm and they should round-robin the session across those LNS
> device IPs. You can also adjust the priorities in your RADIUS response
> if you want to have un-equal load balancing. Any good 3rd party
> provider should support this.
>
> Cheers,
> James.
>

P.S. why would you not recommend ASR vs ASR-X? (There is a huge price
difference on eBay).

On Mar 28, 2017 12:07 PM, "Bruce Technical" <brucetechnical@gmail.com>
wrote:

> ***sending again with reply all and a minor change***
> Hi James,
>
> Not late at all. We are deciding this week to go with one ASR-x or
> multiple 7206vxr.
>
> 1- How would couple 7206vxr work together when our ISP is wanting to
> connect to LNS first and not Radius?
>
> 2- I am asked to pick single or multimode fiber. For 7206vxr which one
> should I pick and which is supported?
>
> 1000 customers is not bad for the price of a VXR.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> On Mar 6, 2017 4:39 AM, "James Bensley" <jwbensley@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11 February 2017 at 20:03, Bruce Technical <brucetechnical@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > We are entering the DSL reseller market and costs for ASR1001-x or
>> ASR1002-x
>> > are in the $20k+ for Cisco ASR1001-x + IP Advance Licenses + 500
>> Sessions.
>> >
>> > We are considering used 7204VXR. What is it in ASR1001-x that 7204VXR
>> can't
>> > do for example?
>> >
>> > Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.
>> >
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Bruce
>>
>>
>> Hi Bruce,
>>
>> I know this is a late response (I've been away and I'm catching upon
>> emails), but for the sake of the list archives it might help someone
>> else.
>>
>> As others have already mentioned the ASR1000 series will scale much
>> further and so it costs more. For the price of an ASR1001-X (I
>> wouldn't bother with non-X versions anymore) you can buy several
>> 7206VXRs with NPE-G2 but you won't have TAC support and scaling limits
>> (only 1G interfaces and stuff like NAT quickly chews up CPU).
>>
>> > Our Service Provider require LNS/LAC, L2TP, VRF, and Radius.
>>
>> This is what I would call the basic feature set of an LNS so both ASR
>> and 7200 series devices provide both functions as well as stuff like
>> QoS and NAT.
>>
>> We don't scale our 7200s above 1k sub's. We are an LLU provider but
>> when it comes to FTTC/VDSL we normally terminate that locally in the
>> PoP. So if we take a wholesale ADSL and VDSL connection into a central
>> LNS from a 3rd party supplier we have to be weary that the 7200's on
>> have 1G interfaces as we can sell bonded ADSL & VDSL over the 3rd
>> party L2TP tunnels so 1G == 1k sub's is about right in my head.
>>
>> Someone mention about the RADIUS challenges for ASR's, I have some
>> notes on example RADIUS configs here:
>> https://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=avpairs
>>
>> If you look under: Cisco new style ("ip") VSAs
>>
>> ASRs need to use these style of VSAs on the virtual access interface.
>> Further down are the "older" style VSAs however both types are support
>> on the 7200s with a 15 IOS so initially it did catch us out when
>> migrating to ASRs but we just did a mass backed update in
>> Postgres/RADIUS so all accounts use the "newer" style and there all
>> users could be connected to either a 7200 series or ASR series LNS.
>>
>> If you're going to deploy an ASR maybe check out these notes I made on
>> initial limitations and issues we hit:
>> https://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=asr-ios-xr-lns-config
>>
>> some of them are resolved now in newer XE versions and I haven't had
>> time to update the notes but it’s worth double checking in the Cisco
>> doc's for yourself. For example, we just dropped L2 port-channels in
>> exchange for multiple 1G layer 3 interfaces and/or 10G interfaces,
>> they caused too much trouble with QoS and NetFlow and SNMP monitoring.
>>
>> You had some queries regarding load balancing across multiple LNS
>> devices. Assuming you use RADIUS on your side to speak with your 3rd
>> party provider (I highly recommend this) you can return the IP of all
>> 3 LNS devices (or however many you have) back to the provider for any
>> user or realm and they should round-robin the session across those LNS
>> device IPs. You can also adjust the priorities in your RADIUS response
>> if you want to have un-equal load balancing. Any good 3rd party
>> provider should support this.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> James.
>>
>

On 28 March 2017 at 19:55, Bruce Technical <brucetechnical@gmail.com> wrote:
> P.S. why would you not recommend ASR vs ASR-X? (There is a huge price
> difference on eBay).
>
> On Mar 28, 2017 12:07 PM, "Bruce Technical" <brucetechnical@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> ***sending again with reply all and a minor change***
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Not late at all. We are deciding this week to go with one ASR-x or
>> multiple 7206vxr.
>>
>> 1- How would couple 7206vxr work together when our ISP is wanting to
>> connect to LNS first and not Radius?
>>
>> 2- I am asked to pick single or multimode fiber. For 7206vxr which one
>> should I pick and which is supported?
>>
>> 1000 customers is not bad for the price of a VXR.
>>
>> Best Regards,



Hi Bruce,

>> 1- How would couple 7206vxr work together when our ISP is wanting to
>> connect to LNS first and not Radius?

That's a bit odd. I would expect the normal procedure to be as follows
(visual representation here:
https://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=adsl2-2-ppp-over-l2tp-life-cycle),
sorry if you know all this it’s not meant to be patronising:

- CPE comes online and wholesaler LAC queries the CPE for authentication details
- Wholesaler LAC sends access-request using the CPE provided
authentication details to wholesaler RADIUS to check if these details
are correct
- Wholesaler RADIUS see's these detail belong to another ISP (you!) an
will proxy the authentication request to your RADIUS (forwards your
RADIUS the access-request
- Your RADIUS authenticates the user and in the access-accept response
to the wholesalers RADIUS send your tunnel-endpoint IP and password
(your LNS IP and password)
- When wholesaler RADIUS response sends this access-accept back to the
LAC in response to the LACs access-request
- The LAC builds the L2TP tunnel to your LNS
....

From then on it’s all within your domain of responsibility.

We have one wholesaler who's LACs speak to our RADIUS servers, so they
are dual purpose devices, LAC and RADIUS Proxies. If the wholesaler
wants their LAC/BRAS to talk to your LNS directly without any RADIUS
involvement, how will you be able to dynamically return your LNS IP,
unless they have fixed details: *@realm1.net > 1.2.3.4 (your LNS IP),
*@realm2.net > 5.6.7.8 (another of your LNS IPs) etc.

With multiple LNS as we heave, either the wholesaler RADIUS asks our
RADIUS for the tunnel-endpoint IP and we return multiple IPs with the
same preference and they round-robin across them (we can offset the
preference in the RADIUS reply if we want to traffic steer certain
sessions to certain LNS devices), or in the case of that “other”
wholesaler, their LACs talk to our RADIUS then build the L2TP to our
LNSs and again round-robin of the multiple IPs returned.


>> 2- I am asked to pick single or multimode fiber. For 7206vxr which one
>> should I pick and which is supported?

Both are supported (you would purchase an MM or SM SFP/GBIC to go into
the chassis line card, the transceiver “handles” the MM/SM port and
the chassis is agnostic of it more or less). Multimode is usually
cheaper although single mode will carry for a greater distance. You
just need to weigh up what’s right for you there, nothing to
complicated.


>> 1000 customers is not bad for the price of a VXR.

I’m in the UK, with the rise of FTTC that number will probably come
down. CPU == throughput (more or less) on the 7200 series, slowly we
are moving from 1000x 8Mbps ADLS to some hundreds of 40-80Mbps FTTC.
7200s are so cheap you can scale our horizontally easily, just deploy
more LNS’s and return the additional IPs in your RADIUS response.
However 10x 7200s is a lot more hassle than say 2x ASR1006-X. 7200s
are so cheap though, have one if not two in the lab, probably some
others lying around in storage we’ve forgotten about etc. It’s
expensive to have an ASR 1000 series sitting in the lab for very
occasional usage.


> P.S. why would you not recommend ASR vs ASR-X? (There is a huge price
> difference on eBay).

The non-X versions either are EoS already or will be soon. The X
versions are pretty much the defacto for the 1000 series devices. The
H-X versions are out and they will eventually replace the X versions
but that is still some years away. So for now if someone was going to
put in a new deployment I’d recommend the X versions as the death
knell has been rung for the non-X versions (bug fixes, TAC support,
code upgrades etc). The X versions are more expensive as they are the
next generation from the original non-X versions and much faster and
more scalable.


Cheers,
James,
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba

Diagram below:

Wholesaler Fiber >. our Radius Server
| |
ASR-1001-x(A) ASR-1001-x(B)

Best Regards,

On Mar 31, 2017 8:08 AM, "Bruce Nikzad" <bruce@rayantelecom.ca> wrote:

> Hi James,
>
> Thanks for the details. I appreciate any and all diagrams and guides as
> it's my first time ha fling this.
>
> Here is a big difference about what I am hearing here and maybe I have
> heard it wrong. Apparently our wholesaler provider wants their fiber to
> connect directly to our ASR-1000-x (we are not decided on equipment yet but
> they recommend to sell us ASR-1000-x) and then Radius gets quiried and
> gives ASR the OK to send back to wholesaler.
>
> ^^^ If above is true (which never made sense to me) then we can't have
> multiple Cisco routers that support LAC.
>
> The only other thing they said is that they can round robin this to our
> multiple ASRs. I guess directly to them than a Radius.
>
> Is it possible they are doing it differently than your structure?
>
> Best Regards,
>
>
> On Mar 31, 2017 4:44 AM, "James Bensley" <jwbensley@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 28 March 2017 at 19:55, Bruce Technical <brucetechnical@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > P.S. why would you not recommend ASR vs ASR-X? (There is a huge price
> > difference on eBay).
> >
> > On Mar 28, 2017 12:07 PM, "Bruce Technical" <brucetechnical@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> ***sending again with reply all and a minor change***
> >> Hi James,
> >>
> >> Not late at all. We are deciding this week to go with one ASR-x or
> >> multiple 7206vxr.
> >>
> >> 1- How would couple 7206vxr work together when our ISP is wanting to
> >> connect to LNS first and not Radius?
> >>
> >> 2- I am asked to pick single or multimode fiber. For 7206vxr which one
> >> should I pick and which is supported?
> >>
> >> 1000 customers is not bad for the price of a VXR.
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> >> 1- How would couple 7206vxr work together when our ISP is wanting to
> >> connect to LNS first and not Radius?
>
> That's a bit odd. I would expect the normal procedure to be as follows
> (visual representation here:
> https://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=adsl2-2-ppp-over-l2tp-life-cycle
> ),
> sorry if you know all this it’s not meant to be patronising:
>
> - CPE comes online and wholesaler LAC queries the CPE for authentication
> details
> - Wholesaler LAC sends access-request using the CPE provided
> authentication details to wholesaler RADIUS to check if these details
> are correct
> - Wholesaler RADIUS see's these detail belong to another ISP (you!) an
> will proxy the authentication request to your RADIUS (forwards your
> RADIUS the access-request
> - Your RADIUS authenticates the user and in the access-accept response
> to the wholesalers RADIUS send your tunnel-endpoint IP and password
> (your LNS IP and password)
> - When wholesaler RADIUS response sends this access-accept back to the
> LAC in response to the LACs access-request
> - The LAC builds the L2TP tunnel to your LNS
> ....
>
> From then on it’s all within your domain of responsibility.
>
> We have one wholesaler who's LACs speak to our RADIUS servers, so they
> are dual purpose devices, LAC and RADIUS Proxies. If the wholesaler
> wants their LAC/BRAS to talk to your LNS directly without any RADIUS
> involvement, how will you be able to dynamically return your LNS IP,
> unless they have fixed details: *@realm1.net > 1.2.3.4 (your LNS IP),
> *@realm2.net > 5.6.7.8 (another of your LNS IPs) etc.
>
> With multiple LNS as we heave, either the wholesaler RADIUS asks our
> RADIUS for the tunnel-endpoint IP and we return multiple IPs with the
> same preference and they round-robin across them (we can offset the
> preference in the RADIUS reply if we want to traffic steer certain
> sessions to certain LNS devices), or in the case of that “other”
> wholesaler, their LACs talk to our RADIUS then build the L2TP to our
> LNSs and again round-robin of the multiple IPs returned.
>
>
> >> 2- I am asked to pick single or multimode fiber. For 7206vxr which one
> >> should I pick and which is supported?
>
> Both are supported (you would purchase an MM or SM SFP/GBIC to go into
> the chassis line card, the transceiver “handles” the MM/SM port and
> the chassis is agnostic of it more or less). Multimode is usually
> cheaper although single mode will carry for a greater distance. You
> just need to weigh up what’s right for you there, nothing to
> complicated.
>
>
> >> 1000 customers is not bad for the price of a VXR.
>
> I’m in the UK, with the rise of FTTC that number will probably come
> down. CPU == throughput (more or less) on the 7200 series, slowly we
> are moving from 1000x 8Mbps ADLS to some hundreds of 40-80Mbps FTTC.
> 7200s are so cheap you can scale our horizontally easily, just deploy
> more LNS’s and return the additional IPs in your RADIUS response.
> However 10x 7200s is a lot more hassle than say 2x ASR1006-X. 7200s
> are so cheap though, have one if not two in the lab, probably some
> others lying around in storage we’ve forgotten about etc. It’s
> expensive to have an ASR 1000 series sitting in the lab for very
> occasional usage.
>
>
> > P.S. why would you not recommend ASR vs ASR-X? (There is a huge price
> > difference on eBay).
>
> The non-X versions either are EoS already or will be soon. The X
> versions are pretty much the defacto for the 1000 series devices. The
> H-X versions are out and they will eventually replace the X versions
> but that is still some years away. So for now if someone was going to
> put in a new deployment I’d recommend the X versions as the death
> knell has been rung for the non-X versions (bug fixes, TAC support,
> code upgrades etc). The X versions are more expensive as they are the
> next generation from the original non-X versions and much faster and
> more scalable.
>
>
> Cheers,
> James,
>
>
>

On 31 March 2017 at 13:08, Bruce Nikzad <bruce@rayantelecom.ca> wrote:
> Is it possible they are doing it differently than your structure?

Sounds like they are doing something a bit weird J

If you are planning for multiple LNS's, how will they support that if
they are going to connect directly to just one LNS in your network?

You need to get them to clarify the whole design end to end. When we
take interconnects with wholesalers we land them on a PE. Multiple
interconnects from the same wholesaler will land on different PEs for
resilience and we will advertise the IPs of our LNS's and RADIUS
servers over BGP to them.

Then they have the choice, their RADIUS and LAC’s can speak our RADIUS
and LNS devices in any order they like.

If you just have one or a handful of realms, *@realm1.net you can
always tell your wholesaler “my LNS IPs are 1.1.1.1, .2, .3 and .4,
please RR over them all”, then their RADIUS won’t need to speak to
yours.

Cheers,
James.
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba