|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: OSPF multi-level hierarch: side question
Anyway, do you aggregate the customers to the single box, or do not, 2 level hierarchy scheme (backbone + AREA for big nodes) is quite satisfacted. Another problem - how do you flood small updates. For example, if we here allocate dial-up addresses from the central cache, amd I inject this host addresses into the network. Through, both methods (OSPF or IBGP) works fine for the middle-size dialup pop's, and I don't think you need to do it instead of using local address-pools in case of large dialup pop's. Alex. On Fri, 28 May 1999, Steve Meuse wrote: > Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 02:58:52 -0400 > From: Steve Meuse <[email protected]> > To: Vadim Antonov <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OSPF multi-level hierarch: side question > > > At 03:33 PM 05/27/1999 -0700, Vadim Antonov wrote: > > > >Tony Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>I suspect that the main driver is not the amount of routing information > >>in the gross sense, but the scalability of the protocol as the number of > >>nodes increases. > > > >There's a better solution: decrease the number of nodes by replacing > >clusters with bigger boxes. This has an additional advantage of reducing > >number of hops (and, consequently, latency variance). > > > >K.I.S.S. rulez :) > > > >--vadim > > Side question: > > At what point do we stop aggregating customers onto a single box? The > technology exists now to have hundreds if not thousands of customers on a > signle box, but, Do we want that many? > > -Steve > > > > Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow (+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager) (+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
|