Frame-Relay vs MPLS

[tterenzetti]

Our organization is in the process of deploying a private WAN. We are considering proposals from 3 telcom vendors. Two of the vendors utilize Frame-Relay based systems; the third vendor has a MPLS VPN

based system. (We are simply the end-user.) How do these two technologies/designs compare performance-wise, etc., and are there any particular issues associated with either design which I should be aware of ?

[scottmac]

MPLS (which is probably MPLS over Frame) provides much more control over the bandwidth utilization and path.

In typical carrier Frame-relay, you get an access rate, a CIR, and a certain amount of burst. The physical and logical path is set up by the carrier according to the available resources.

With MPLS, you can request and get specific end-to-end QOS, and the path can be engineered per PVC, according to the label assigned to the traffic.

MPLS requires an MPLS-enabled router at your location(s), frequently with specifc levels of operating code and (possibly) hardware (coordinated with the carrier).

If they're comparably priced, the MPLS system is likely to offer a more flexable system in the future, especially if you plan to implement VoIP (QOS, usually better latency specs by virtue of the traffic engineering permitted by MPLS).

FWIW

Scott

[lars]

Hmmm... I might correct you a little on your statement about the need of MPLS-enabled routers at the customers location.

On of the major benefits of MPLS networks is, that the end costumer doesn't need to have MPLS-enabled routers, in fact MPLS is only in the providers core network.

What you need to connect to the providers network is either regular routers (ranging from Cisco 17xx and up) or even switches, depending on how the connection from the providers edge to the customers network.

If using a router-based connection to the provider, you are able to use the providers network as a part of your own routing domain, that is, you are able to peer your routers with the providers routers, even tough you are using a regular IGP (dynamic or static routing).

I agree with the fact, that the MPLS network is to prefer if prizes are alike.

[scottmac]

Yep, you got me! I misunderstood the role of the "Customer Edge" (CE) device.

I found this:

(quote)

Straightforward Migration—For service providers to quickly deploy VPN services, use a straightforward migration path. MPLS VPNs are unique because you can be build them over multiple network architectures, including IP, ATM, Frame Relay, and hybrid networks.

Migration for the end customer is simplified because there is no requirement to support MPLS on the customer edge (CE) router and no modifications are required to a customer's intranet.

For a list of platforms supported by MPLS VPNs, refer to the section entitled Supported Platforms.

shows an example of a VPN with a service provider (P) backbone network, service provider edge routers (PE), and customer edge routers (CE).

(end quote)

at the following link:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1830/products_feature_guide09186a00800e977b.html

Thanks for the correction.

Scott