Re: wiretapping continues....

[Vadim Antonov <avg () sprint net>]

> > John Scudder then discussed some modeling he and Sue Hares have done
> > on the projected load at the NAPs. The basic conclusions are that the
> > FDDI technology (at Sprint) will be saturated sometime next year...

> MarkFedor/ColeLibby from PSI said there was a "quiet" admission that the old
> methodology was already "approved" for the SPRINT NAP.

This technology works *now* (Sprint NAP is already in production use)
and there is a clear path for upgrading it to practically unlimited
aggregate bandwidths:

1)      replace FDDI concentrators with FDDI switch
        (this gives us up to 1Gbps of total bandwidth
        while limiting access to one full DS-3)

2)      replace single FDDI with multiple FDDIs (realistically
        with 2 or 3) -- allowing access at OC-3 speeds

3)      build point-to-point bypasses between peers with
        OC-3s or FDDI to take the traffic out of shared
        medium.

We will hit limitations of the present/then-future routing technology
long before we'll exhaust the possibilities to increase the
NAP aggregate and access bandwidth by cheap incremental upgrades.
That's the whole point of Sprint NAP architecture. ATM/SMDS/Flame Delay
do not get even close to what we achieve (and ATM is not useful yet).

Load balancing between NAPs is necessary, but for entirely different
reasons -- first, because of capacity limitation on nation-wide
backbones and, second, to reduce latencies on cross-ISP traffic.

--vadim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -