On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 3:44 PM, Tomas L. Byrnes <tomb@byrneit.net> wrote:
In my experience, ATT(SBC at that time) hit over its effective capacity (over 50% average utilization, and therefore no redundancy) around 2001.
Sounds like you're talking about 7018, not 7132 (SBC), and even 7018 is doing okay for capacity now that its high-traffic customers (Comcast) are moving traffic elsewhere. Do you have any specific data to share with the NANOG community supporting of these claims?
At least for clients I was working with, it was always evident that they didn't have enough capacity in any node to carry the traffic if they had a problem on any single upstream link. They also tended to manually handle routing decisions as opposed to letting the IGP handle it.
Likewise, I'd be interested in implementation specifics of how a network of AT&T's caliber could implement backbone redundancy and TE with static routing. Any data you could share would be extremely helpful. Paul Wall _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog