nanog mailing list archives
Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?]
From: Michael.Dillon () radianz com
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2004 10:35:24 +0100
I'm wondering why you think that the fiber over the ceiling tile is somehow less tracked, maintained, monitored, documented, etc., than any other fiber in the network?
If someone was really concerned about trackability, etc., then I suspect they would invent a number for that cable, put a record in their circuit database, and use their nifty label maker machine to put labels every meter along the cable's length stating the circuit number, and NOC contact info. All of that work is still not much more than the effort of stringing the cable but it makes the whole architecture a lot more scalable. So there is a middle ground between flinging cables around and paying $1000 per month for a cross-connect... Middle grounds are nice places to play in. Lot's of variety, lot's of possibilities. --Michael Dillon
Current thread:
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?], (continued)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Bill Woodcock (Jul 04)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Steve Gibbard (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points Niels Bakker (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points Christopher L. Morrow (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] joe mcguckin (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] vijay gill (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Patrick W Gilmore (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Tony Li (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Patrick W Gilmore (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Michael . Dillon (Jul 06)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Paul Vixie (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] vijay gill (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Paul Vixie (Jul 05)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Michael . Dillon (Jul 06)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Leo Bicknell (Jul 06)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] vijay gill (Jul 06)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 06)
- RE: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Mark Borchers (Jul 06)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 08)
- Re: concern over public peering points [WAS: Peering point speed publicly available?] Steven M. Bellovin (Jul 08)