[50530] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Bonding ATM circuits for DSL
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Martin, Christian)
Thu Aug 1 17:04:17 2002
From: "Martin, Christian" <cmartin@gnilink.net>
To: "'Christopher J. Wolff'" <chris@bblabs.com>, nanog@merit.edu
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 17:02:27 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
The question is whether IMA exists on DS3 interfaces. I would suspect that
the cell rate may be kind of high to support even load-balancing/splitting.
Kinda like doing MLPPP on a pair of OC-12s.
However, this is generally not needed unless your VC(P) needs to run at
greater than the theoretical peak cell rate of the interface. If you have
small DSL PVCs, you can just round-robin them via static PVC provisioning,
or PNNI load-sharing of soft vcs.
HTH
-chris
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Christopher J. Wolff [mailto:chris@bblabs.com]
>Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 4:51 PM
>To: nanog@merit.edu
>Subject: RE: Bonding ATM circuits for DSL
>
>
>
>I may have answered my own question. Create an IMA group interface.
>
>Regards,
>Christopher J. Wolff, CIO
>Broadband Laboratories, Inc.
>http://www.bblabs.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On
>Behalf Of Christopher J. Wolff
>Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 1:46 PM
>To: nanog@merit.edu
>Subject: Bonding ATM circuits for DSL
>
>
>
>Greetings.
>
>Has anyone experienced adding additional ATM DS3's and bonding
>those together to form a single "fat pipe". For example if
>you had a Qwest megacentral DSL DS3 loop and wanted to add
>another one to make 90 megs instead of 45 megs is that done on
>the ISP side or the Telco side or both? Thank you all so much
>for your wisdom.
>
>Regards,
>Christopher J. Wolff, CIO
>Broadband Laboratories, Inc.
>http://www.bblabs.com
>
