Ejay Hire wrote,
>It kind of violates the way it's supposed to work though. If
>everyone skips off to an alternate backbone service, Will we still
>keep upgrading the existing (free/mostly free) backbone?
How do you see the existing backbone as free/mostly free? A good
working definition of a "tier 1 provider" is one that learns all its
routes through bilateral peering arrangements, and does not buy
transit from anyone or default to anyone. Incidentally, these
peerings are rarely through the shared fabric at exchange points, but
are on private media.
Lower in the food chain, even major regional providers buy transit
services from national and international tier 1 providers. Think of
transit services as the right to default to the higher-level
provider, and to receive full or partial routes from the provider.
The problem that InterNAP and others are trying to solve is that a
lower-level ISP or enterprise may go through several intermediate
service providers to reach tier 1. Connecting to InterNAP, in
principle, gives more predictable service. I know some of the
engineers there and regard them as extremely clueful.
Of course, the benefits of "clean" paths to tier 1's are most obvious
on long-haul circuits. Especially in more remote areas, it still can
be quite beneficial to have local exchange points, so a dialup
customer can get to the local pizza web site or the town library
without having to cross a continent to get to a major exchange.
In other words, global routing is still something where you need to
understand the big picture, or involve someone who does.
----Original Message Follows----
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Nigel Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Easing Internet backbone traffic..thoughts..!
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2000 18:23:55 -0700
Sounds like a creative way to optimize traffic forwarding on the Internet.
Seems a bit like MPLS, but more real-time.
Locating the company in Seattle is probably a good idea. Not only is Amazon
in Seattle, but maybe they'll get Microsoft as a customer too?
Hopefully some of the gurus will comment also. Thanks for telling us about
this interesting article.
At 11:17 PM 9/27/00, Nigel Taylor wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>http://www.eetimes.com/story/OEG20000926S0089
>
>I was reading this article over at EE Times and was wondering if you folks
>had any thoughts on what this means or how it applies to the already
>existant/non-existant BGP routing policies between the Major
>players(digex, UUNet, MCI etc....) Howard, I'm really interesting in yuor
>thoughts on if this could be a solution to the Internet routing problem
>seeing the current inexperience and knowledge of BGP in the use of the
>protocol.
>
>Nigel
"What Problem are you trying to solve?"
***send Cisco questions to the list, so all can benefit -- not
directly to me***
Howard C. Berkowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Technical Director, CertificationZone.com
Senior Product Manager, Carrier Packet Solutions, NortelNetworks (for ID only)
but Cisco stockholder!
"retired" Certified Cisco Systems Instructor (CID) #93005
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
