Exchanges that matter...

Vadim Antonov avg at
Wed Dec 4 20:27:53 UTC 1996

Todd Graham Lewis <lists at> wrote:

>Exchange points are not analogous to COs; major routing problems ensue as
>the number of exchange points increase.

Yep.  There's no magic solution for that (Nimrod-style global link-state
_may_ help, but i'm not sure).

> I admire the foresight of 
> those attempting to develop new exchange points. I do not envy the uphill 
> battle they have before them. des

>I don't envy them either, but I'm beginning to question the "a chicken in
>every pot and a NAP on every corner" approach to network design.

Well, the "small NAPs" are pretty much useless, as most traffic goes beyond
the geographical area served by a "small NAP";  and the "large NAPs"
can be in dozens, but _not_ hundreds or thousands.

The "NAP in every corner" is simply a manifestation of the rampant
cluelessness in regard to the global routing.

>Of course, I don't strictly have to worry about these things; that's why I
>and AOL and most network operators have upstream network providers.

Well, AOL has its upstream provider in a different sense :)


More information about the NANOG mailing list