[45735] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: it's here
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jon Stanley)
Thu Feb 14 01:33:59 2002
Message-ID: <5C0C29BEFF68C2429B0FF6579BEC3DE70B28@beavis.rmrf.net>
From: Jon Stanley <jstanley@beavis.rmrf.net>
To: "'jlewis@lewis.org'" <jlewis@lewis.org>,
jerry scharf <scharf@vix.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 00:14:07 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Hmm - who said they had to be physically separate? Being a layer 2 centric
network has allowed us to extend device management functionality to not only
the core, but also straight out to the edge CPE equipment - every piece of
(non-legacy) CPE that we have has a 1918 address on it that the customer
cannot see.
The only incremental cost is the management of the management network -
almost minimal, as the IP tracking scheme that we have extends nicely into
the /32 range. There is also the required bandwidth, and the need for
additional PVC's to the customer prem (these are 64k UBR PVC's) - again,
minimal when you own the layer 2 network.
Just my 2 cents.
PS - these views are my own and do not necessarily represent those of my
employer.
-----Original Message-----
From: jlewis@lewis.org [mailto:jlewis@lewis.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 10:56 AM
To: jerry scharf
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: it's here
sites) spanning multiple states or countries. Not everyone can afford to
build both a backbone and a separate management WAN. Putting management
in 1918 space is ok at one location, but gets tricky on a large network.
Do we then also buy/maintain VPN hardware to connect all the various 1918
management networks to the NOC?
