On Wednesday, July 02, 2014 10:47:14 AM Catalin Petrescu wrote: > I think you are referring to this test > http://www.eantc.de/fileadmin/eantc/downloads/events/2011 > -2015/MPLSEWC2013/EANTC-MPLSEWC2013-WhitePaper-5.1.pdf ,
No, not that test. The test I'm talking about is in a live operator. But thanks for the link, anyway :-). > The paper doesn't say what version they are running on > asr as per cisco documentation only static configuration > is available thus only S-PMSI is advertised at least in > 4.3.2. I ran a PoC in Raleigh at the end of last year with Cisco, and they supported both I- and S-PMSI on the ASR9000. Par-for-par, I'm now satisfied with using an ASR9000 as a video-enabled edge router. The only reason we always stuck to Juniper, until now, is because they had a working NG-MVPN implementation. Cisco have now come to the party, both in terms of p2mp RSVP-TE and mLDP. So they are certainly on my radar if we need to deploy edge routers. Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
