nanog mailing list archives
Re: Ungodly packet loss rates
From: "Dorian R. Kim" <dorian () cic net>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 19:29:26 -0400 (EDT)
On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Jon Zeeff wrote:
Sure there is. Running one larger interconnect has the potential to be much less expensive and easier to run than many smaller ones. Economy of scale...
Perhaps from the perspective of a NAP operator, maybe. Large interconnects like MAE-East does not have better scaling characteristics then private interconnects, both from infrastructure and staff resources point of view. -dorian - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates, (continued)
- 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 Wolfgang Henke (Oct 22)
- RE: Ungodly packet loss rates Chris A. Icide (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Sean Donelan (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates John Curran (Oct 22)
- Re: Ungodly packet loss rates Curtis Villamizar (Oct 23)