[138721] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Sun Mar 13 13:27:38 2011
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=8hJDhACW4WOBJNrzVD-GFPcKAOmTQwd2MaR6Z@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 13:27:34 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: Jeff Wheeler <jsw@inconcepts.biz>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Jeff Wheeler <jsw@inconcepts.biz> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 7:27 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
>> That must be my mistake then, because I thought the exercise was
>> building it in a way that it stays built for the maximum practical
>> number of years. When it has to be touched again (or tweaked if it
>
> So when you upgrade a device, you always buy the suitable device which
> has the highest capabilities? =A0You put in a top-of-rack switch with
> 10GbE for servers with no 10GbE ports and no plans of needing 10GbE
> connectivity to the next round of servers? =A0You buy a modular router
> for branch offices that have only a few workstations and no
> predictable need for upgraded connectivity?
there's probably a different need in TOR and BO/SOHO locations than
core devices, eh?
