[13413] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: New MAE-EAST
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeffrey C. Ollie)
Wed Nov 5 14:58:41 1997
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1997 13:50:59 -0600
From: "Jeffrey C. Ollie" <jeff@ollie.clive.ia.us>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Alec H. Peterson wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 05, 1997 at 12:46:50PM -0800, Adam Hersh wrote:
> > With all of the problems with MAE-EAST.....
> >
> > Any plans from anyone to create a ATM exchange point in the DC area?
>
> I can't think of a reason why somebody would do that.
>
> All of the problems that mae-east is having is a clear sign that
> providers need to move their big peers off of the public fabric and
> onto private interconnects. Aside from the engineering problems, it
> just seems so difficult to justify having such an important part of a
> backbone's existance controlled by a third party. As these recent
> problems have illustrated, either that third party is either not
> capable or not willing to fix the problems. Either way, the end
> result is the same.
I don't think that the problems of MAE-EAST necessarily indicate
problems with the exchange point concept in general. Others have
indicated satisfaction with exhange points run by other parties. What
the problems of MAE-EAST indicate to me is that FDDI/GigaSwitches are
not the appropriate technology for MAE-EAST sized exchanges and that MFS
is the wrong company to be running an exhange point.
It would appear to me that there is an opportunity for a new player to
get into the exchange point game.
Since ATM seems to be a controversial choice to build exchange points,
has anyone thought about using fast ethernet with an eventual transition
to gigabit ethernet when gigabit ethernet becomes more mainstream?
Jeff
