North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Converged Networks Threat (Was: Level3 Outage)

  • From: David Barak
  • Date: Thu Feb 26 13:07:46 2004

--- 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.