Currently we have a Frame network of six routers with two different ISPs, each at a different site. We have an ASN and three of our internal routers share BGP tables from the two providers. The remaining three routers are spokes to this core.
The "core" is arranged in a triangle of Frame PVCS. So, we have an ISP coming in two two different legs (AT&T on one, Sprint on the other) and the three core routers share the BGP tables.
We've being sold a MPLS solution.
Our six routers will now be arranged as a full mesh. We're keeping the two ISPs. Currently we use the ISPs as fail-over and Least Cost Routing. Out MPLS vendor says the Label-to-route mapping is actually in the PE and full Internet BGP routing information is too much for them.
My understanding of MPLS is limited, so I'm doing a fair amount of reading. I understand, I think, there are mechanisms where the mapping can be moved to the CE, thereby proving us with least cost routing across the full mesh because the mapping burden is in our routers. The PE, then, simply has a table of labels and routes based on those labels we (somehow) attach. Is any of this true?
If my understanding s anywhere near correct, please point me to some reference material. My overall impression is my MPLS vendor is trying to screw me by removing functionality from my current network (LCR) and inserting themselves as a "managed" solution, with associative increased cost.