EPC backhaul networks

Phil Bedard bedard.phil at gmail.com
Sun Jan 30 16:33:42 CST 2011

I work for a MSO and while we do provide L2 services today for wireless
backhaul, the services are based on requirements from the wireless
providers and I haven't seen an RFP yet in which someone wanted a L3
service. If someone really wanted a L3VPN as a backhaul solution we could
oblige them but most do not want us having anything to do with their L3
network so we provide VPLS and P2P services.  I'm always wary when I see a
wireless provider wanting to build a 500 site VPLS to carry traffic and we
try to discourage them as much as possible, but it happens...


On 1/30/11 3:55 PM, "Cameron Byrne" <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike at swm.pp.se>
>> On Sun, 30 Jan 2011, Cameron Byrne wrote:
>>> The only way to reach 2000 cell sites in Chicago with 100megs of
>>> handoff is with L2 metroE.  There is not a feasible L3 service offered
>>> today.
>> Ah.
>> We either rent fiber or put up our own radio links, I guess different
>> problems in different markets.
>Yep.  I hate L2.  It is a total nightmare. But, it is literally the
>only game in town.  I blame the MEF for spreading propaganda that
>MetroEis the best solution for backhaul ... most people dont even
>think of L3 solutions.... all the telcos, cable-cos, and utilities in
>this space only do L2  to the cell site.... even though they all use
>the same Juniper and ALU gear that does L3 too ...
>> --
>> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se

More information about the NANOG mailing list