North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: value of co-location
| Bottom line: about 270,000 pps per port, 14 microsec. | forwarding latency AND superior reliability. The choice | for NAP designers everywhere :)- Bilal, I think you missed a word. "Successful" seems to have been omitted between "choice" and "for". Some NAP designers opted for packet shredders, and might even be getting some thousands of pps total traffic (so they claim, but then they seem to count very local (i.e., cross-town) ATM connectivity as "NAP" traffic), as opposed to the low tens of thousands of packets per second *per port*, with much of that being traffic between sites with about 30 times the delay * bandwidth buffering requirements. Of course, the fact that the switched FDDI exchange points have proven to be more reliable in practice than the ATM exchange points have -- even with a fraction of the load -- tends to do nothing to diminish the religious fervour of the people who assert that ATM NAPs are the ultimate single answer to the needs of the Internet. I wonder sometimes if their brains were cellified and passed through an ATM NAP... Sean.