|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: The questions stand
On Wed, May 20, 1998 at 01:56:19PM -0400, Pickett, David wrote: > My objectives are far more pedestrian than any effort to confuse or > divide the Internet community. I'm working at getting a handle on what > about the NAPs does and does not work. I've seen some discussion on > frames vs cells in the NAPs, and that's an interesting albeit > religiously charged subject. I've heard speakers soap-boxing about the > need for a decent policy-free L2 interconnect. Are we there yet? Who's > heading in the right direction? Does the current NAP model meet your > needs as ISPs? Do we just light more fibre or do we need a better > solution? Reply to the list or to me directly. I'm all ears. > > David R. Pickett > Northchurch Communications Inc > 5 Corporate Drive > Andover, MA 01080 > 978-691-4649 This, unfortunately, is a highly-charged and highly emotional topic. Part of the problem with "public exchanges" is that they get congested. But the REASONS for that congestion are not, I believe, that well understood. Can we just build faster exchanges? Sure. Will it solve the problem? Not if carriers don't provision fast enough circuits into them! If you're seeing poor performance between <X> and <Y> at an exchange, is it due to the exchange fabric's poor performnace, or is one of <X> or <Y> under-provisoned into that fabric? Have either of those carriers DELIBERATELY (or through negligence) failed to provide adequate connectivity to the exchange? How do you determine which is the case in these situations? I'd love to see an exchange which PUBLISHED the "saturation rates" at each *PORT* to the world, identifying the carrier and speed of connection at each PORT. Also, in the same breath, they would need to publish the total FABRIC capacity as well as its saturation. That would mean that those who say "oh, don't route though <X>, come to this nice private interconnect (perhaps at some cost)" would get called on the carpet if the reason for their statement was that they had impaired performance through the exchange due to a lack of appropriate commitment. Likewise, if the *EXCHANGE* operator was negligent (or just unable to keep up with demand) we could hold THEIR feet to the fire as operators. Sadly, I know of NO exchange currently in operation that subscribes to these operating rules and policies. -- -- Karl Denninger ([email protected])| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly / All Lines K56Flex/DOV | NEW! Corporate ISDN Prices dropped by up to 50%! Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost
|