[102811] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joel Jaeggli)
Wed Feb 27 23:00:48 2008
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:59:04 -0800
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: frnkblk@iname.com
CC: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAADZejQX2qfCQbtUUjLKyQ+yAQAAAAA=@iname.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote:
> To keep this OT as much as possible, my question is if a mesh-configuration
> of backup routes (where one link could provide 'protection' for many) would
> be considered a sufficient replacement for SONET rings, or if the Qwest CTO
> is really trying to get out of providing sub 50-msec protected loops and
> encouraging L3 and above protection schemes, so that they can even further
> over-subscribe their network.
It's cool that the telecommunications companies have caught up with the
times. they're only about 44 years late.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM3097/RM3097.chapter2.html
That said the 3 cross country fiber paths they have weren't dictated by
the network model they were operating under but rather Southern/Union
Pacific's available right-of-way and Philip Anschutz's relatively
efficent use of capital.
