[50832] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Do ATM-based Exchange Points make sense anymore?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard A Steenbergen)
Sat Aug 10 17:55:49 2002
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 17:55:17 -0400
From: Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net>
To: Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net>
Cc: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>,
"nanog@merit.edu" <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.44.0208101741590.164-100000@when.hq.nac.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sat, Aug 10, 2002 at 05:42:32PM -0400, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
>
> > What is the current max speed of frame relay in any common vendor
> > implementation (I'm talking routers here).
>
> Doesn't OC48 POS on GSR and Jewniper do FR?
Welcome to MAE Chicago/New York, http://www.mae.net/FE/. But M160's and
OC48 ports are expensive, I suspect its overkill for the amount of traffic
that will actually be exchanged there.
I do wonder why most GigE exchange points are still doing single lan
segment peering instead of having a peermaker type service for dynamic
vlan configurations. Manual configuration is slow and a pain, and with
some of them charging you per-vlan what it would cost for a copper
crossconnect, it's no wonder most people don't use them.
--
Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
