Attempt to summarize Links on the Blink
freedman at netaxs.com
Mon Nov 13 16:16:14 UTC 1995
> I would like to try to understand better where this discussion seems to
> have come to rest. Yesterday the suggestion was made that the major
> providers add more bandwidth to their backbones. There seemed to be no
> assertion as to how this could be done.
> 1. OC-3 is not yet routable on backbones. Is that correct?
Well, I was told that the Cisco AIP card can talk point-to-point to another
AIP card at OC-3 speed using either HDLC or PPP.
> 2. What is the routing impact of parrallel T-3s? Or the creation of a
> mesh of T-3s? I have the impression that this is not feasible because it
> would expand the routing tables unacceptably or because of the questions
> of how you would load balance among them??
If data can be routed on parallel T3s on a per-connection basis so that
there isn't a scrambling of ordering of packets per connection, then some
benefit is achived, though no single application or site can use more
than a T3 of bandwidth.
> 3. There seems to be some consensus that we will see an increase in the
> numbers of NAP or MAE like interchange points which could cut down on the
> traffic that must traverse long haul backbones. *BUT* doesn't each
> additional interchange point used by all the top level providers mean
> another new set of global routes crowding router memories?
It depends. If routing decisions are made locally and the routes heard
at smaller or private exchange points by NSP x are not distributed to
NSP x's larger peering/route-decision routers, then possibly no. That
would mean only hearing routes at private exchange points that were also
heard elsewhere (at a major peering point).
> 4. How much help will regional NAPs like Tucson be? Their goal is to
> keep local traffic local and off long haul backbones. What liklihood is
> there that these will grow in numbers quickly enough to make a
> difference? If the majors start showing up at these points does their
> arrival mean that the problem of crowding memory in their backbone
> routers will be increased?
More information about the NANOG