[13051] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Possible topic?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Avi Freedman)
Sun Oct 26 01:04:55 1997
From: Avi Freedman <freedman@netaxs.com>
To: schnell@gsd.sprint.com (Steven Schnell)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 01:57:55 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: snowdog@charm.net, justin@priori.net, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971021211619.006b2e48@cde1.gsd.sprint.com> from "Steven Schnell" at Oct 21, 97 09:16:19 pm
> Can you reveal your source? I have received no complaints from MCI or
> others at the NAP.
>
> >There is a FDDI Ring at the NAP which was overcrowded.
> >It apparently took some legal action to get Sprint
> >(or whoever is responsible for the Sprint NAP :) )
> >to make the necessary upgrades. What I've heard is that
> >4 GigaSwitches are being installed from MFS and that
> >this installation/upgrade ETR is 1-2 months.
>
> You obviously have no knowledge of Sprint's NAP topology! All providers
> are directly connected to GIGAswitch ports. Only providers with one (1)
> DS3 to their router share one GIGAswitch LAN. Hardly enough traffic to
> saturate a 100 Mbps (dedicated) LAN!
No worries, Steve -
Some goober has confused Pennsauken with MAE-East.
Considering the trouble that MFS had getting their one Netedge turned up
to bridge Pennsauken out to the world a few years ago (<poke poke>), it's
unlikely that they'd try to bring 4 Gigaswitches in :)
As a happy NAP user, I can say that Pennsauken is truly a stable telco-
grade facility. Which makes it slow to get things turned up. And hard
for ISPs to deal with at times. Session uptimes of many months are
usual at Pennsauken, and I've NEVER seen NAP-caused packet loss there.
Avi
