|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Converged Networks Threat (Was: Level3 Outage)
--- vijay gill <[email protected]> wrote: > How would you know this? Historically, the cutting > edge technology > has always gone into the large cores first because > they are the > ones pushing the bleeding edge in terms of capacity, > power, and > routing. > > /vijay I'm not sure that I'd agree with that statement: most of the large providers with whom I'm familiar tend to be relatively conservative with regard to new technology deployments, for a couple of reasons: 1) their backbones currently "work" - changing them into something which may or may not "work better" is a non-trivial operation, and risks the network. 2) they have an installed base of customers who are living with existing functionality - this goes back to reason 1 - unless there is money to be made, nobody wants to deploy anything. 3) It makes more sense to deploy a new box at the edge, and eventually permit it to migrate to the core after it's been thoroughly proven - the IP model has features living on the edges of the network, while capacity lives in the core. If you have 3 high-cap boxes in the core, it's probably easier to add a fourth than it is to rip the three out and replace them with two higher-cap boxes. 4) existing management infrastructure permits the management of existing boxes - it's easier to deploy an all-new network than it is to upgrade from one technology/platform to another. -David Barak -Fully RFC 1925 Compliant __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Get better spam protection with Yahoo! Mail. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools
|