[nsp] Cisco DS3 Questions..

Jesper Skriver jesper at skriver.dk
Fri Feb 22 19:45:31 UTC 2002


On Fri, Feb 22, 2002 at 11:27:16AM -0600, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> 
> Thus spake "Gyorfy, Shawn" <sgyorfy at elinkny.com>
> > Since the topic exploded, what are your opinions on encapsulation of
> leased
> > line DS3s.  We currently use Frame Relay for out Point to Point DS3
> > connections.  Personally, I don't know why we use FR as our encapsulation,
> > and so the question to all.  If you are running Cisco to Cisco, would it
> be
> > wise to run HDLC or PPP?  Our DS3s' here are hardly maxed out, 15% or so,
> so
> > I'm not complaining about the few extra bits I can squeeze out them but
> > maybe that 15% can shrink to 10% with less overhead.  Opinions or examples
> > of life appreciated.
> 
> As you're finding out, this is largely a religious issue.  There are no
> significant differences in overhead between HDLC, PPP, and FR.  Any
> performance difference can be more easily attributed to vendor
> implementation than to protocol efficiency.
> 
> In practice, HDLC is the dominant encapsulation, primarily since it's
> Cisco's default.  If for no other reason, you should use HDLC because almost
> everyone expects you to be using it.  PPP is obviously present in non-Cisco
> shops, and anywhere MLPPP or LFI is needed.  FR is only used as a p-t-p
> encapsulation in certain cases that require it; almost nobody uses it
> without a good reason.

We allways use PPP, the primary reasons being:

- The line protocol goes down when the line is looped.
- It's easier to debug than HDLC

/Jesper

-- 
Jesper Skriver, jesper(at)skriver(dot)dk  -  CCIE #5456
Work:    Network manager   @ AS3292 (Tele Danmark DataNetworks)
Private: FreeBSD committer @ AS2109 (A much smaller network ;-)

One Unix to rule them all, One Resolver to find them,
One IP to bring them all and in the zone to bind them.



More information about the NANOG mailing list