|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Selfish routing
> > [email protected] wrote: > > > > Do you have more than one exit right now? Do you push around 100Mbit/sec to > > each of those providers? Since you aparently have the money, did you > > negotiate dials around $50 Mbit/sec exit on giges and OC-12 with 100Mbit > > CIR? > > > You assume things not in fact, primarily that I have the money to > increase capacity. Burstable costs more than full rate. One can use 3 > lower end routers to adequately handle 3 OC3 circuts much more cost > effectively than buying a single high end router to handle OC-12, gig-e, > etc. Rubbish. One does not need to buy a high-end router to deal with OC-12 worth of traffic. In fact, one can get OC-12 interfaces for not so high-end routers. Not to mention that for a lot of applications discussed, giges would do just fine. > In addition, if the circuits are handled off at different > geographic locations, you will need 3 high end routers to handle the > OC-12, gig-e, etc, which increases the price exponentially. If one cannot afford to buy them outright, one leases or finances them. It will still be cheaper then adding a magic bullet box, plus one will actually add routing capacity that one needs anyway. > You also assumed that OC-12 and Gig-e is available in the geographic > region and that the interconnected networks can support such throughput > in that portion of their network. OC-12s and giges are available nearly everywhere as long as one actually has 100Mbit/sec traffic levels. If a sales person from the company is unwilling to accomodate one using OC-12 and gige fabric, then the odds are the person wanting those OC-12s/giges does not have the traffic he/she claims to have to begin with. If that traffic does, in fact, exist, then one simply needs to find a different sales person or start doing business with a different company. > > I dont know which world do you live in, but today the sales people will beg > > for 100Mbit/sec CIRs on OC-12 links just to meet the quotas. So, why dont > > you get those 100Mbit/sec CIRs on OC-12c? > > > I live in rural America. I provide access for rural America. There is > only one public exchange point close buy and it is over 100 miles from > my nearest pop (and the exchange has it's own problems). Capacity from > various networks is limited, and it can take over 6 months to get the > carriers upgraded to handle a new OC3, much less OC-12 or gig-e. Why are you getting carriers to upgrade to handle OC-3 as opposite to getting your own dark fiber and lighting it up? In 6 month they will build you the 100 miles in nowhere. It is actually a lot more difficult to get them to cross Park Avenue in Manhattan then it is to get fiber into rural area. > > Why is your 100Mbit/sec delivered over OC-3s when with 100Mbit/sec CIRs you > > can get OC-12 ports from basically everyone? > > > Your perspective is skewed. OC-12 ports are not available from everyone, > everywhere. Obtaining, lighting, and maintaining fiber for long haul is > not inexpensive. Do you *really* believe that metro gear works only in metro areas? I must have been dreaming having nightmares using bringin up PHL-DC span with only metro equipment located in DC, BLT and PHL. > > Network planning *is* about not making mistakes. > > > Only in an ideal senario. Cost has a lot to do with it. I've watched > numerous companies enter Chapter 11 due to spending too much in > capacity. The perfect network is not the perfect business model. Again, network planning *is* about not making mistakes. Having a business model that does not start with "Cisco will finance us so they get to make the quarterly numbers" is not a part of network planning. The reason a lot of those companies are in chapter 11 is because they were buying the long-haul gear when they could have used metro for 1/4 of the price, because they insisted on paying nearly list price for gear, because they ordered 4xOC3 as opposite to 1xOC12 (even though the application required gige to begin with). > > Performance does not depend on cost effective interconnects. They are NOT > > related. > > No, but if you do not have cost effective interconnects, you will not > have a business. Operating at a guaranteed loss is stupid at best. No, buying a piece of gear that that brings a routing service for which one gets to pay thousands dollars every month when ones does not have enough routers is equivalent to taking a daily driven car that has engine problems to a detailing shop as opposite to a mechanic while saying "I cannot afford both". As far as the operating at loss goes, it is nearly guaranteed that a company that sells broadband via ethernet at a price less than it pays for those megabits, gambling that the clients wont be using the bandwidth as opposite to calculating the real cost, and marking it up. > > > Rubbish again. The fundamental problem with this entire industry is that > > some very clever marketing and sales people managed to convince entire bunch > > of rather bright geeks that networks are complicated. The truth is, it is > > not, however, since you have been told that it is over a million times, you > > want to believe that it is. > > > To use your word, "Rubbish." Your opinions are based upon specific > business models and available resources. My opinions are based on observation of what happens to the companies whose networks do not run well, companies that buy tons of gear to please the VCs that finance them (because VCs invested into those who sell them gear), companies that build networks and think the customers will come. > It does not take into account > that costs do limit available resources. In many cases, money itself is > the resource that is lacking. Marketing and sales people do not hold > sway over everyone, but many of those people are also shrewed in > business and recognize that concessions must be made to maintain > profitability. So how spending money on a box that sometimes helps your routing decisions when you dont have enough routers is the concession that must be made to maintain profitability? Alex
|