[29191] in North American Network Operators' Group
exchange point media (was: Re: MAE-EAST Moving? ...)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Wed Jun 14 17:00:34 2000
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:58:14 +0200 (MEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006141632270.16975-100000@harmony.hudes.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10006142245540.750-100000@uplift.swm.pp.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 dhudes@hudes.org wrote:
> Isn't the push to MAE-ATM ?
> For better or worse -- the FDDI switch MAE can't hope to keep up
> when people are building OC-48 cross-country backbones. All that traffic
> goes someplace. It becomes expensive to have multiple ports on the FDDI
> switch paying for each.
Are there any other suggestions, other than ATM? Here in Sweden the
exchange point is being replaced/extended using DPT/SRP (currently OC12,
will be OC48 when cisco can deliver hardware). I have serious doubts that
using this technology is the answer though, the rings become fairly large
and I doubt it'll be efficient in the long run (even though it is better
than FDDI at current traffic amounts).
Gigabit ethernet sounds nice but the MTU of 1500 is really restricting
that technology. I have heard rumours that 10gig ethernet will have at
least 4000+ byte MTU, probably 9000+ which might make it viable to use for
a shared medium exchange point as the hardware probably will be fairly
cheap and/as it will be widely available supported by many vendors.
Shared medium exchange points that work well must be the technology to be
most economic as you can talk to several others using one interface
instead of having to set up separate interfaces for each peering you want
to establish? Isn't the lack of good technology here percieved as a threat
to internet growth?
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
