[190200] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 1GE L3 aggregation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Sat Jun 18 07:10:06 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com>
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2016 13:05:37 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAAeewD_0a-c6Ge33j2-T6evXMeWzVNeeRTZ=LXEuFxdA54zx1g@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 16/Jun/16 22:27, Saku Ytti wrote:
> I'm not saying it's bad solution, I know lot of people do it. But I
> think people only do it, because L3 at port isn't offered by vendors
> at lower rates.
A lot of people did it because because there really wasn't a cheap,
dense solution until about 2010. And even then, the traditional strategy
had become so entrenched that running IP all the way in the Access was
such a foreign concept which was most certainly a lot more expensive
than incumbent Layer 2-based Access models.
I feel this has since changed with the current offerings from Cisco,
Juniper and Brocade. The problem now is how to scale the low-speed port
density up, as well as add 10Gbps port density, without increasing the
cost or size of the platforms.
Mark.
