JoelC707
join:2002-07-09
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| reply to JimPletcher
Re: Beginner needs T1 point-to-point advice/help
Who says you need something new like the 1800? What about the 2600, specifically the 2620? Basically all you need is a router with a T1 CSU/DSU and a 100 meg or faster ethernet interface. Any router will really work with the exception of the cable/dsl routers you're using now. But that brings up a question. What model routers are you using now and what type of internet connection is at each site? I'm wondering if your problem can be solved with a lower cost approach. If your internet connection is flaky or your router is anemic it's no wonder you're having problems. Personally my money is on an anemic router that can't handle the load you're putting on it. |
|
JimPletcher
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Enola, PA
2 edits | Your talking to someone with ZERO real knowledge of Cisco models. I'll look into the 2600 series.
Each site currently uses ZyWALL 5 routers.
Today the (DSL) ISP watched the traffic from the main server location, and it looked like we were maxing out the 768 upload. The cable ISP is a whole 'nother problem we get 16,000 down and 2,500 up BUT have to go through 15 routers with a latency of 250ms.
Two PTP T1 lines would give us 1.544 to each remote location for a maximum total upload of 3.088 from the main location.
The two PTP T1 lines would cost $1,100 monthly as opposed to $1,900 for three IP MPLS VPN connections.
Don't let this make you feel that I know anything, I'm still learning about higher speed WAN connections. |
|
JoelC707
join:2002-07-09
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| ZyWall 5's are nice routers and should NOT be the bottleneck. In fact I wouldn't put them in the same category as typical Linksys, D-Link cable/DSL routers. With only 768 upload at one location, THAT is your bottleneck. What you need to do is get service at all locations from the same company. It doesn't really matter if it's cable or DSL but in this case cable looks to be the better choice. As long as you stick with the same ISP, then traffic to your other sites will never leave their network. In other words, you stay on networks they control. Once you have to route to another ISP you have to use the public backbone which they cannot control. I guarantee you the 250ms latency and 15 hope you see now will drop to 15 - 20 ms latency and 5-6 hops depending on where the sites are.
It doesn't even matter if the sites are in different cities or different states. Comcast and I'm sure others have interconnected all their cable systems to create their own private backbone. You'd still have quite a few hops (I go through 15 hope from Tucson to Atlanta but it never leaves Comcast's network). Plus the cable ISP has much faster upload than the T1 and as long as you stay on their network it's almost guaranteed you'll see all of that available speed. Keep this in mind, you are only as fast as your slowest point.
As for the routers, the Cisco 2600 series has been discontinued but is still perfectly usable. The only downside is that you can't get maintenance contracts on them anymore and likely won't get software updates either. If you do decide to go the PTP route I would suggest three circuits, one between each site. You will essentially have two T1's at each site. What this accomplishes is redundancy. If the link between Site A and Site B goes down, Site A can still get to Site B via Site C. This will obviously increase the traffic at Site C but it's better than being totally down. If it helps I can draw up a diagram of what I'm talking about. |
|
JimPletcher
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Enola, PA
2 edits | Thanks for your input.
We've already maxed out the DSL options in the area.
Comcast hasn't responded in a way that gives me any confidence in improved service.
But, based on your comments, I'll keep bugging them. |
|
JoelC707
join:2002-07-09
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| If your DSL options are maxed out then it looks like cable is your only "cheap" option. What are you trying to get Comcast to do for improved service? All you really need to get them to do is give you service at the other two locations if it's available. If these locations are in office complexes or the like then cable service may not be available. They are starting to push their business side of the house though so hopefully that means they are expanding their footprint. Is there anything else wrong with the Comcast service at that one location? How are the speeds and latency to other sites? If you can surf without problems them your real issue would be with the interconnect to the backbone either at Comcast or the other ISP. Eliminating the other ISP and standardizing on one will eliminate that problem altogether. |
|
JimPletcher
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Enola, PA
1 edit | Thanks again for your comments.
I agree that the major problem at the Comcast location appears to be related to getting on the public Internet before going to the final (DSL) ISP
We can get Comcast at the other two locations, but so far, I haven't been able to get them to commit to providing the same level of service at these two locations that we have at the existing Comcast location.
We are apparently getting more (better speeds) at the existing Comcast location than they generally offer.
I'll contact their regional office on Monday, and if I get the right kind of response, you will have saved my client a fair amount of cash and me a lot of aggrevation. |
|
JoelC707
join:2002-07-09
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| said by JimPletcher  :I'll contact their regional office on Monday, and if I get the right kind of response, you will have saved my client a fair amount of cash and me a lot of aggrevation. That's our goal. Get you what you need at the cheapest price (and if possible get you better service for your money like in this case).
As for the speeds, if you are doing business class that 16/2 service is their "enhanced" package and is the one I have. They do have a standard tier package that should be 8/1 but I would imagine any tier would be available anywhere they have service. I'd be curious to hear what they have to say. |
|
JimPletcher
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Enola, PA
| Comcast didn't respond to my e-mail(s) or voice-mail yesterday, so I had to call them again today.
They can install the 61/2 service within 7 days, but say that the traffic will not necessarily stay on their network.
This negates half the reason of choosing Comcast! |
|
JoelC707
join:2002-07-09
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
| They have to say that because they can't guarantee with 100% certainty where your traffic will flow at any time. Are the other two sites in the same metro area? If so it is pretty much certain that traffic between them will never leave the city. If they are in other cities or even other states, it should flow over their interconnected network but any number of things could cause it to fall back to public backbone transit. |
|
cooldude9919
join:2000-05-29
Cape Girardeau, MO
clubs:
| reply to JimPletcher
said by JimPletcher :Comcast didn't respond to my e-mail(s) or voice-mail yesterday, so I had to call them again today. They can install the 61/2 service within 7 days, but say that the traffic will not necessarily stay on their network. This negates half the reason of choosing Comcast! im pretty sure you have 30 days to cancel with comcast(if you go a 1yr or 2yr route) so it may be worth a shot to try it at one of the sites and see how things look, and if its bad then just cancel it. |
|
JimPletcher
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Enola, PA
| reply to JoelC707
Three towns involved.
Two MAY be considered in the same area, but the third is decidedly NOT.
A Comcast trace route between one of the local areas and the more remote site (which already has Comcast) involved four routers and went well past the intended destination before coming back to it. It's like we're trying to connect a stepchild. |
|
JoelC707
join:2002-07-09
Tucson, AZ
clubs:
1 edit | The route it takes can vary depending on where in the city it's going. A trace route from Tucson to Atlanta (Decatur) involves 13 hops, all never leaving Comcast's network. The IP I did the trace to hits two routers in Atlanta, the headend and the hubsite it's hosted from (I traced to the CMTS, what many call the "node"). If I had traced to an actual PC it would have had one more hop to go though. Likewise if I do a trace to a PC on the north end of town say in Norcross, It will in one case go through 5-6 more hope before it gets there. If I can remember the IP I used, I'll post examples so you can better see what I'm talking about.
Edit: Can you post a screen shot of the traceroute you did? I could tell you pretty certainly from that if they are considered to be in the same area. Just block out the destination IP address. |
|
JimPletcher
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Enola, PA | Unable to provide a screen shot, because the test was conducted from another location.
All four routers were Comcast but I don't remember the IPs. |
|
JimPletcher
Premium
join:2004-04-05
Enola, PA | reply to JoelC707
We switched the two remote locations to ComCast last night.
All three locatins now on Comcast
WAN performance today appears acceptable with all locations having 2.5 upload |
|
