[13117] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAP Architecture
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@isi.edu)
Wed Oct 29 11:58:59 1997
From: bmanning@isi.edu
To: blkirk@float.eli.net (Ben Kirkpatrick, ELI)
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 08:44:19 -0800 (PST)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.95.971029081154.29333A-100000@float.eli.net> from "Ben Kirkpatrick, ELI" at Oct 29, 97 08:25:33 am
>
> Forgive my ignorance on these matters, but why haven't many NAPS tried
> to be L1 based, or at least provide the option of private wire/fiber
> between the larger customers in the same room. It seems to me that this
> would significantly reduce the complexity and packet-loss we're currently
> seeing. How long would it take to troubleshoot a cross-over FE compared
> to trouble shooting two routers connected via a oversubscribed switch.
> Marketing types are concerned about how to bill and track these, but
> there should be some easy ways around those issues.
>
> --Ben Kirkpatrick
> Data Products, Electric Lightwave, DID=360.816.3508
> -not speaking for ELI, not even speaking-
> "Consciousness: that annoying time between naps."
Many have and do. What you describe is often called "private interconnect"
I understand you can get this service at:
Sprint
PAIX
LAP
and most MAE's
--
--bill
