nanog mailing list archives
Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture
From: neil () DOMINO ORG (Neil J. McRae)
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 10:16:54 +0100 (BST)
http://www.nspllc.com/New%20Pages/Reliable%20IP%20Nodes.pdf Argues that by going from a dual-router POP design to a single redundant router configuration, I can reduce annual downtime costs by 93% (?) and reduce CAPEX and OPEX (seems logical). Also mentions that the single redundant router can get closer to the ever-elusive 5-9's. Anyone doing this in their network? Is there validity in the claims in this white paper? Anyone looked at the Alcatel product that apparently funded this paper?
I'd believe the numbers in this, what I don't believe yet though is that there are products available that true give the same level of redundancy that having two boxes does... Regards, Neil.
Current thread:
- Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Pete Kruckenberg (Apr 09)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Neil J. McRae (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Brandon Ross (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Peter E. Fry (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Brandon Ross (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Brandon Ross (Apr 10)
- Re: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Neil J. McRae (Apr 10)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Dual node vs "Reliable IP" Architecture Jim Deleskie (Apr 10)