nanog mailing list archives
Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 19:59:04 -0800
Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote:
To keep this OT as much as possible, my question is if a mesh-configuration of backup routes (where one link could provide 'protection' for many) would be considered a sufficient replacement for SONET rings, or if the Qwest CTO is really trying to get out of providing sub 50-msec protected loops and encouraging L3 and above protection schemes, so that they can even further over-subscribe their network.
It's cool that the telecommunications companies have caught up with the times. they're only about 44 years late.
http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM3097/RM3097.chapter2.htmlThat said the 3 cross country fiber paths they have weren't dictated by the network model they were operating under but rather Southern/Union Pacific's available right-of-way and Philip Anschutz's relatively efficent use of capital.
Current thread:
- Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity Frank Bulk - iNAME (Feb 27)
- Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity Joel Jaeggli (Feb 27)
- Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity Paul Wall (Feb 27)
- Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity Joe Abley (Feb 28)
- Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity Adrian Chadd (Feb 28)
- Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity Joe Abley (Feb 28)
- Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity Adrian Chadd (Feb 28)
- Re: Qwest desires mesh to reduce unused standby capacity Joe Abley (Feb 28)