[6406] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Exchanges that matter...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vadim Antonov)
Wed Dec 4 15:33:46 1996
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 12:27:53 -0800
From: Vadim Antonov <avg@pluris.com>
To: lists@reflections.mindspring.com, nanog@merit.edu
Todd Graham Lewis <lists@reflections.mindspring.com> wrote:
>Exchange points are not analogous to COs; major routing problems ensue as
>the number of exchange points increase.
Yep. There's no magic solution for that (Nimrod-style global link-state
_may_ help, but i'm not sure).
> I admire the foresight of
> those attempting to develop new exchange points. I do not envy the uphill
> battle they have before them. des
>I don't envy them either, but I'm beginning to question the "a chicken in
>every pot and a NAP on every corner" approach to network design.
Well, the "small NAPs" are pretty much useless, as most traffic goes beyond
the geographical area served by a "small NAP"; and the "large NAPs"
can be in dozens, but _not_ hundreds or thousands.
The "NAP in every corner" is simply a manifestation of the rampant
cluelessness in regard to the global routing.
>Of course, I don't strictly have to worry about these things; that's why I
>and AOL and most network operators have upstream network providers.
Well, AOL has its upstream provider in a different sense :)
--vadim
