On 27/03/2014 11:34, "Nick Hilliard" <n...@foobar.org> wrote: > >Neil, I'm puzzled as to how you think remote ixp peering might work, if >not >over physical/virtual l2 connections?
I can think of one other way but that wasn¹t my point; in my view I wouldn¹t take this approach at all. I can get L3 transit at a lower price than the cost and agro of virtual connections and get overall a better connectivity solution. If I need scale I can get a circuit and put a router on site and get a bunch of other benefits and then get the real benefits of being at an IXP in whole rather than virtually, with better QoE and a lot more certainty about shared fates. YMMV. One thing that concerns me a great deal is the patch work of virtual connectivity that¹s been created and I¹m concerned that many networks really don¹t understand enough about the underlying network they are operating on, or that there suppliers suppliers suppliers network is working on. Perhaps even in a transition tx sense this issue still existed but it was, at least in my view, more transparent and simplifies modelling. Cheers, Neil.
