[57433] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Neil J. McRae)
Thu Apr 10 05:18:17 2003
To: pete@kruckenberg.com (Pete Kruckenberg)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 10:16:54 +0100 (BST)
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0304092315050.5729-100000@minot.kruckenberg.com> from "Pete Kruckenberg" at Apr 09, 2003 11:19:59 PM
From: neil@DOMINO.ORG (Neil J. McRae)
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>
>
> http://www.nspllc.com/New%20Pages/Reliable%20IP%20Nodes.pdf
>
> Argues that by going from a dual-router POP design to a
> single redundant router configuration, I can reduce annual
> downtime costs by 93% (?) and reduce CAPEX and OPEX (seems
> logical).
>
> Also mentions that the single redundant router can get
> closer to the ever-elusive 5-9's.
>
> Anyone doing this in their network? Is there validity in the
> claims in this white paper? Anyone looked at the Alcatel
> product that apparently funded this paper?
I'd believe the numbers in this, what I don't believe yet
though is that there are products available that true give
the same level of redundancy that having two boxes does...
Regards,
Neil.
