There are a number of boxes that can do this, or are in beta. It would be a horrific mistake to base an exchange point of any size around one of them. Talk about difficulty troubleshooting, not to mention managing the exchange point. Get a Foundry BigIron 4000 or a Riverstone SSR. Exchange point in a box, so to say. The Riverstone can support the inverse-mux application nicely, on it's own, as can a Foundry, when combined with a Tiara box. Daniel Golding NetRail,Inc. "Better to light a candle than to curse the darkness" On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, Vadim Antonov wrote:
There's another option for IXP architecture, virtual routers over a scalable fabric. This is the only approach which combines capacity of inverse-multiplexed parallel L1 point-to-point links and flexibility of L2/L3 shared-media IXPs. The box which can do that is in field trials (though i'm not sure the current release of software supports that functionality).
--vadim
On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, Masataka Ohta wrote:
Randy;
BGP Route Reflector IXPs need a AS number. I'll send you a URL with a whitepaper. The BGP Route Reflector IXPs have proved to offer a low entry cost for ISPs (for those places that do not have the deep pockets to get big routers).
except that big routers are not needed for small-isp exchanges. remember, an isp participating in such an exchange has only to add the prefixes of their local peers to their routing, typically a dozen or so. there are very successful layer-two exchanges where the peers use what we think of as cpe routers, e.g. cisco 2501s. and what's nice is that this is on the right path to exchange growth.
l3 exchange ponints are a labor suck and are fragile.
Maybe. However, l2 is for telco.
l2 exchange ponints are a labor suck and are fragile.
The right path is l1, though, then, there is less reason to have exchange points.
It will be more obvious as the peering speed between two ISPs exceeds that of a single physical interface.
Masataka Ohta