[141250] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Internap FCP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Mon Jun 6 21:48:25 2011
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1106061323100.1734@bart.robotics.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 07:17:31 +0530
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
To: Nathan Stratton <nathan@robotics.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Nathan Stratton <nathan@robotics.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jun 2011, Ryan Pugatch wrote:
>> We are currently looking into Internap FCP as we are in the process of
>> redoing our network infrastructure and taking on managing BGP ourselves
>
> The reporting is not bad and it does an ok job. We ended up building our own
> because the FCP was not able to look at enough of the active flows. I
> believe the overall idea can provide a lot of value, it just was not the
> best solution for our needs.
Any alternatives? To start with, able to optimize routes across say
two to four circuits.
--
Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)
