|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Interconnects
On Sat, 18 May 2002 11:14:47 +0100 (BST) "Stephen J. Wilcox" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, 17 May 2002, Sean Donelan wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 17 May 2002 [email protected] wrote: > > > perhaps better late than never... PAIX & LINX both > > > have IPv6 capabilities at/on the exchange fabric(s). > > > I am not aware that Equinix has taken that step. > > > > Uhm, another dumb question. > > > > Why does the operator of a layer 2 exchange care (or know) what > > protocols your are using? IPv4, IPv6, heck I remember seeing > > Appletalk, OSI and DECNET on MAE-EAST. What consenting network > > operators do.... > > LINX for example permits very specifically IPv4 only, no multicast > including routing protocols etc, no mac broadcasts ie spantree. > Doesn't the LINX have a separate LAN for a multicast exchange ? I know that this was set up, but I don't know what it's current status is. Regards Marshall Eubanks > I think theres a danger on very large switching fabrics that if youre not > specific things will happen that are detrimental to all members.. all > major switching problems I know of at LINX were caused by members doing > something not permitted by the rules... > > Just because you -could- do something without the operator knowing doesnt > mean you should, the rules are there for everyones protection and I think > the fact that when people do things they shouldnt it has caused problems > speaks for itself in that respect. > > Steve > > > > > > What step does Equinix (or any other layer 2 exchange) need to do? > > The ATM NAPs might have an issue due to ATM/ARP, but even then I suspect > > two consenting network operators could use static IPv6 ARP tables > > without the NAP operator doing anything. > > > > > > >
|