MPLS networks have become quite the buzz word, these days. Recognition for manageability of MPLS networks is well deserved. But if you have only one or two remote locations across the globe, is MPLS the best solution? In a word (two?): perhaps not.
MPLS networks make the most economic sense with networks with more than two nodes. For a simple point-to-point network, an International Private Line (IPL) may be more cost effective and provide the needed quality of service.
First off, an IPL is dedicated clear channel bandwidth. It is your private network, usually, with no management, i.e. it’s all yours. Using your routers, you configure your network and traffic shaping as you desire. By the same token, in many cases, the carrier is not in a position to ping your router to see if it is alive, simply because your IPL is completely private, so they can’t! None-the-less, this is a perfectly logical approach to a point-to-point network.
While an IPL can be considered a point-to-point circuit, in reality, there can be plenty of redundancy built into the carrier infrastructure to protect you from cable cuts and failures. But you need to ask the carrier about this, since automatic switching to alternative paths is an extra option with some carriers. Many carriers offer multiple layers of protection with SDH self-healing architecture for automatic recovery and rerouting.
In addition to IPL, another option is EIPL, which is Ethernet Private Leased Lines. More on that in the future.
