nanog mailing list archives
Re: Ungodly packet loss rates
From: John Curran <jcurran () bbnplanet com>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:34:52 -0400
At 15:39 10/22/96, Kent W. England wrote:
... But there isn't any gee-whiz technology that you can do at a private interconnect that you can't do at a NAP/MAE. Open NAPs aren't bad engineering.
While there is no difference from a technology perspective, there's also no benefit to be gained by interconnecting large networks at a public (as opposed to private) interconnects. One can certainly make the argument that running large traffic flows through shared interconnects is bad engineering if a private interconnects for such traffic are available. /John - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates, (continued)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Avi Freedman (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Owen DeLong (Oct 21)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Matthew Kaufman (Oct 21)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Wolfgang Henke (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates bmanning (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Justin W. Newton (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Avi Freedman (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Vadim Antonov (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Kent W. England (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Michael Dillon (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates John Curran (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Jon Zeeff (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Tony Li (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Dorian R. Kim (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Alex.Bligh (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Gordon Cook (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Steve Goldstein (Oct 23)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Jessica Yu (Oct 23)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Rod Nayfield (Oct 23)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Robert Laughlin (Oct 23)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Jon Zeeff (Oct 22)
- RE: Ungodly packet loss rates Chris A. Icide (Oct 22)