Yes. To me, it seems that WCom is policing the amount of traffic one can shove into a ATM port, so the giga-fiasco doesn't occur again, which I guess is somewhat of a legitmate cause. However, the difference between the giga and the atm solution is (obviously) there is no such thing as 'head-of-line' blocking on the ATM. Moving to the UBR will allow you to more smartly fill your pipe, and not have arbitrary restrictions on the flows you send in; essentially, the bottle neck with the PCR = 2 * SCR is the PVC, not the port. Considering the nature of internet traffic, this seems silly. However, the ability to build multiple PVC's in parallel from/to the same ports is important to us, and BeerMaker allows us to do this; we'd like to not lose this functionality. On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Lauren F. Nowlin wrote:
Thanks for your update Steve and to Alex for getting the ball rolling.
ONYX would also like to see this change implemented.
The model the AADS team uses is far superior to any other scheme to 'monitor' interactions between peers at the PVC level. Hands-off full mesh build is the easiest to activate rapidly without botched PVCs trickling in one-by-one or stuck in a random queue of a departed employee... The PeerMaker method is too human intensive for little to no gain from an operational sense. A negative if you can't use the capacity for fear of artificial caps being exceeded with other peers, which is the case noted below.
Also, I've never understood why PBNAP PVC build requests between two customers - approved by both customers - have to be sent to PacBell Marketing for approval...
Alex, let me know if I can help your efforts in any way.
Thanks again, -Ren
At 10:15 PM 4/17/00 -0700, Steve Feldman wrote:
When I left wcom, there was a project starting to implement an option to provision UBR PVCs. It required non-trivial changes to Peermaker, so would take some time.
I'll let the current MAE crew answer as to current state, availability, etc. Steve
On Mon, Apr 17, 2000 at 10:37:17PM -0400, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
I've been talking to the WCom MAE folk, and the explained to me that the the VC's between beers are built as ABR, with PCR being twice SCR. Also, the port you lease from them has a non-oversubscription policy, i.e., the sum of all SCR's combined cannot be more than port speed.
From what I can tell, PBNap and Ameritech both build the VC's as UBR, with no over-allocation protection.
In my travels of contacting other providers for peer information, I have run across about 5 (albeit out of about 60 who responded) that said they couldn't turn up new VC's across MAE-East ATM, because they have reached thier subscription allocation, even though thier port is not nearly full. A few had even expressed they wish that it was the ameritech-like UBR model.
One person who I spoke to at WCom had said that maybe someday they would allow UBR PVCs, but there was no timeline.
What are other people's thoughts on this?
-Ren
Lauren F. Nowlin, ren@onyx.net Director, Peering - peering@onyx.net ONYX Networks - http://www.onyx.net/peering/ Office: 650-558-3262, Fax: 650-558-3160, Cell: 650-281-6963