Hello,
I'd like your opinion on the following concept.
It is non-specific to any single MAE or continent
but my original idea is of MAE-EAST and Europe.
An overseas operator could get a circuit from one
of its POPs directly to the MAE ATM switch (matrix)
and set up peering PVCs between its peers and the
router(s) in its POP overseas.
This would eliminate the need for colo space and
remote hands service for an overseas router from
the operator's point of view.
I can immediately think of four drawbacks to this:
1) Routing Protocol Latency
This shouldn't be an issue with BGP.
2) Routing Protocol Bandwidth Waste
This would only be an issue if the operator
would receive lots of same routes from two
or more peers. To be a constant issue those
routes would need to flap a lot too.
3) Router Not On Shared Medium (Ethernet, FDDI)
This could be overcome by some cooperation with
a local provider that has a switch between its
shared medium connection and its router.
The switch should be capable of ATM LANE though
and MAE ATM switches would need more complex
configuration as well. Ideally the MAE ATM
switches would do it directly, but I'm not sure
thay are capable of it?
4) Bandwidth Waste From ATM Encapsulation
A POS circuit would use the long distance
bandwidth more efficiently.
--
Aleksi Suhonen
Network Development
Saunalahden Serveri Oy
AXU-RIPE
Please keep me in the Cc:-field as I'm not
subscribed to the list.
