Comparacion mpls

Internet VPN

With the drop in the cost of Internet bandwidth and VPN hardware, many companies utilize hardware based Internet VPNs for their Wide Area Networks. This historically has been costeffective with satisfactory performance. But as application requirements change, the Internet can become an unsatisfactory medium for your WAN. Applications particularly susceptible to the variation inInternet performance are interactive applications such as ERP, Citrix, RDP, VoIP and video. When these applications come into use, companies realize they need a more robust WAN infrastructure. Theissue arise from the lack of quality of service on the Internet. Packet loss and latency can vary depending on your route which can change at any time.

•
Relies on the global internet, which hasabsolutely no quality of service guarantees.

•
Packet Loss and Latency statistics deteriorate with distance, with greater variability of performance as distance increases.

•
Whennetwork is congested, latency and packet loss rise.

•
Frame Relay has no quality of service (QoS) manageability and is largely being replaced by the more cost effective MPLS VPN Solutions.

•Hardware VPNs are commonly configured as a hub and spoke network.

•
While some limited prioritization can be accomplished with hardware devices, tags are usually removed, limitingeffectiveness.

•
Lowest cost approach to WAN, if performance meets your requirements

Frame Relay

•
AT&T is by far the largest Frame Relay provider, with an installed baseestimated at $6 billion annually. This number is expected to change between 2008 and 2009 when most of these frame relay contracts expire. With these expirations, companies will explore MPLS and othercompetitive offerings, which in many cases will reduce costs and improve manageability and performance of their wide area networks.

•

Frame Relay, until recently, was a networking...