[102815] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adrian Chadd)
Thu Feb 28 09:16:34 2008
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:26:32 +0900
From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@creative.net.au>
To: Joe Abley <jabley@ca.afilias.info>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <330363B7-8FA1-4914-ADB3-A8DEDF129D0E@ca.afilias.info>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008, Joe Abley wrote:
>
>
> On 28-Feb-2008, at 01:56, Paul Wall wrote:
>
> >UU/MFS tried running IP on the 'protect' path of their SONET rings
> >10 years ago. It didn't work then.
>
> Well, it works so long as whoever was trying to troubleshoot the
> circuits at 3am on US Thanksgiving understands that having the system
> "switch to protect" is quite bad, in the sense that it causes both
> sides to go down at once (I seem to remember there was a protect paths
> built for each side of the original ring using a loopback).
>
> Other than the unfamiliarity with the concept demonstrated by phone
> companies, I didn't notice any great fundamental problem with the
> idea. The extra 10G of capacity across the Atlantic was arguably more
> useful in the grand scheme of things than the being able to recover
> from a single-point failure at SONET speeds. It's probably fair to say
> there's more real-time traffic on the network today than there was
> then, however.
Then you probably haven't been on the ass end of a continental fibre link
drop. That actually mattered.
Adrian
