a little thought on exchanging traffic

Wed May 20 12:19:50 UTC 1998

On Wednesday, May 20, 1998 6:18 AM, Sean Donelan[SMTP:SEAN at SDG.DRA.COM] wrote:
@>Anyone thought about eliminating large physical exchange points and replacing 
@>them with a more distributed architecture?
@
@Yes, lots of folks have given it lots of thought.
@
@>Multiple data centers interconnected over ATM in a single metro area run by
@>indepdenant entities who are free to provide any level of service or value
@>add they wish.  
@
@The fundamental problem is there are no magic pixie dust in this business.
@Sure, some people like to put out press releases saying how they've solved
@all the worlds problems using the Magic Frambulator.  But what they've usually
@done is ignored half the problem. 
@

Or...they have designed systems that have the wrong goals...

For example, some people design routers to "attract packets"
like magnets. They design protocols for routers to tell other
routers what packets to send them. Why on earth do people
and companies want packets ? Processing packets costs
time and money. Imagine a world where routers tell other
routers what NOT to send them.

Routers should be designed to "repel packets" and to quickly
get rid of the ones they have. They should also be designed
to send them as quickly as possible to the place they belong
and not to some black-hole called a NAP so that people can
puff out their chests about their NAP being bigger than the
next NAP.

With the introduction of next-generation Internet systems,
we might have a chance to reverse some of the thinking
that has produced the current bottle-necks. Organizations
like NANOG can play a key role because ultimately the
buck stops at your networks, routers, firewalls, servers, etc.
The key to the future is to make sure packets do not also
stop there or come there when you do not want them. ;-)

-
Jim Fleming
Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net/IPv8
IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race
AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM