Todd Graham Lewis <lists@reflections.mindspring.com> 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 :) --vadim