nanog mailing list archives

Re: Extending a MAE connection ...


From: Tony Li <tli () juniper net>
Date: 23 Sep 1997 23:49:57 -0700


Technically, I believe that this is doable.  Using FDDI in NYC would cause
the fewest technical issues.  Note that if the DS3 is to be filled, it may
require more than a 4700.

Please note that this does not constitute an endorsement of the strategy or
of the 'taste' of such an operation.  ;-)

Tony

Here is a question.. a strange one, no less.

Is it feasible to do this:

 
  WASHINGTON DC                               NEW YORK CITY
 
      
                      |   B R I D G E  |
MAE -- 100 Mb/s  -- | Cisco | -DS3- | Cisco | -- FDDI or -- (multiple
East  FDDI        | 4700M |       | 4700M |    100Base T      peers)
giga                                           Switch


Why? here's why.

Several folks in the same building in NYC want to connect to MAE-East.
But, we all don't want T1's or 10 Meg HLI to MAE-East, but DS3. So, this
allows us all to connect to the MAE, peer directly with others without an
intermediary ASN, and we can split the cost of the routers and the DS3. 

I know (at least, I can't think of any reason it can't be done) that is
can be done. The unanswered questions are:

1) Will MFS allow us to connect multiple Peers on the same FDDI port (from
thier webpage, it looks like it, but I am not sure).

2) Is there any technical reason that the above is bad? 

3) Because we do it the way shown above, does that make us look less
attractive (politically) ?

Thanks for any input on this. If there is anything I am missing, please
slap me. Thanks.



Current thread: