|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 22:15:01 -0700 From: Steve Feldman <feldman@twincreeks.net> To: Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net> Cc: nanog@merit.edu Message-ID: <20000417221501.A86516@twincreeks.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.05.10004172229520.1752-100000@shakalaka>; from alex@nac.net on Mon, Apr 17, 2000 at 10:37:17PM -0400 Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu When I left wcom, there was a project starting to implement an option to provision UBR PVCs. It required non-trivial changes to Peermaker, so would take some time. I'll let the current MAE crew answer as to current state, availability, etc. Steve On Mon, Apr 17, 2000 at 10:37:17PM -0400, Alex Rubenstein wrote: > > > I've been talking to the WCom MAE folk, and the explained to me that the > the VC's between beers are built as ABR, with PCR being twice SCR. Also, > the port you lease from them has a non-oversubscription policy, i.e., the > sum of all SCR's combined cannot be more than port speed. > > >From what I can tell, PBNap and Ameritech both build the VC's as UBR, with > no over-allocation protection. > > In my travels of contacting other providers for peer information, I have > run across about 5 (albeit out of about 60 who responded) that said they > couldn't turn up new VC's across MAE-East ATM, because they have reached > thier subscription allocation, even though thier port is not nearly full. > A few had even expressed they wish that it was the ameritech-like UBR > model. > > One person who I spoke to at WCom had said that maybe someday they would > allow UBR PVCs, but there was no timeline. > > What are other people's thoughts on this? > > > >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |