Re: UUNet 10Plus

[mikeg () savvis com (Mike Gaddis)]

Those not interested in Ethernet to ATM control D now...


We are trialing a very similar product so I have been following this
thread
closely.  Peter's insight is useful, thanks.  Before we go too hard on
NetEdge,
however, we should understand that there are a lot of options that are
used
in deploying a service like this.  In our case we run the NetEdge in
routed
mode and leave the DS-3 completely open (Deepak suggested UUNet might
also).
This ATM flow then goes directly to our GigaRouter over an ATM PVC (DS-3
to OC-3).
(FYI, we use the EDGE 40 model.)

This eliminates ATM overhead as an issue on the local loop so any loss
would have to be "network" related in the upstream direction.  The
upstream
flow is metered by the limitation of the Ethernet access on the customer
premise, and although the EDGE 40 has lots of buffers, I would expect
few
are in use in the upstream direction except to manage SAR/processor
pipeline
delay.

However, this overpowered connection, while generally good for the
customer in the upstream direction may pose a problem for the downstream
direction where an open DS-3 can blast into the Ethernet. (Even if the
DS-3
Local loop is metered (paced) to match Ethernet speeds it should not
matter much
since we will just be pushing the buffering problem around.)

Therefore, the ATM to Ethernet buffer is the key.  The EDGE 40 has a
pretty
deep buffer pool (about 2 Mbytes I'm told) so I would expect a pretty
big
burst could be tolerated.  I would like to know if any of the
folks trialing the service were able to determine if their
loss/throughput
problems were upstream, downstream or bidirectinal.

Regards,

Mike Gaddis
EVP & CTO
SAVVIS Communications Corporation

Peter Kline wrote:
> Men,
>
> > From my recollection of NetEdge connections from WorldCom Santa Clara to
> MFS at Market St. in San Jose, the NetEdges have to be used in pairs, like:
>
> CPE -- 10baseT/FDDI ---|netedge|--- DS3 ---|netedge|--- 10baseT/FDDI -- switch
>
> In otherwords, the NetEdges act as bridges, which have to be used in a pair
> in order to turn the ethernet or FDDI connection into ATM over the DS3 and
> back.  The NetEdges are programmable, and I'm sure that bandwidth is one of
> the things that's configurable.
>
> We used to run these things fairly full and fairly hard for extensive
> periods of time.  I think we were able to get about 30Mpbs full duplex out
> of them.  I doubt that dropping packets at ~6Mpbs is the NetEdges' fault
> (unless you had really old ones).
>
> The fundamental problem at the upper bound is that you're taking IP,
> encapsulating it in ethernet or FDDI, then segmenting and further
> encapsulating that (IP inside ethernet/FDDI) inside ATM.  The double
> encapsulation extracts even more of a tax than the !53 bunch usually
> complain about.
>
> In the end, in addition to needing more than the 30Mpbs bandwidth to the
> MAE which the NetEdges gave us, the NetEdge solution was more trouble than
> it was worth because of our inability to monitor the NetEdges for trouble
> (not that they couldn't be monitored, but they were MFS owned gear).  We
> had to rely on Datanet to tell us what was going on, and many times problem
> resolution gave as a cause  FWT (fixed while testing), which customers were
> always reluctant to accept as cause.
>
> If you're interested in a second opinion, you might try contacting NetEdge
> directly.
>
> good luck,
> -peter
>
> At 07:49 PM 7/9/97 -0400, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> > To my knowledge:
> >
> >                                |-------|
> > 10Plus Cust---|netedge|---DS3---| ATM   |
> >                                |       |
> > 10Plus Cust---|netedge|---DS3---|Switch |--ATM--|Cisco 4700/7xx0|--(World)
> >                                |Cascade|
> > 10Plus Cust---|netedge|---DS3---|       |
> >                                |-------|
> >
> > I have no idea what the xBR is on the DS3 to the NetEdge.
> >
> >
> >
> > At 03:17 PM 7/9/97 -0400, Deepak Jain wrote:
> > > My impression [which could be wrong] was that the 10Plus service was
> > > delivered over clear channel DS3 between netedges and the actual 10Mbit/s
> > > portion was dealt with at the media exchange. I didn't know/think they
> > > formatted the DS3 as an ATM 10mbit/s circuit.
> > >
> > > Then again, I have never ordered 10Plus service.
> > >
> > > -Deepak.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Joe Shaw wrote:
> > >
> > > > Well, the ATM connection to the Net Edge box is only setup to do 10Mbps,
> > > > so at 6Mbps on ATM, you've filled your cells.  I think the whole ideaology
> > > > behind the thing is flawed, and if they're going to sell something they
> > > > call 10 Plus, they need to at least provide 10 of something other than
> > > > 10Mbps in theory.  I'm not happy with UUNet (it took 5 months to get the
> > > > Net Edge box replaced), and I doubt they will have anything but the
> > > > smallest possible presence in our network in the future.
> > > >
> > > > Joe Shaw - jshaw () insync net
> > > > NetAdmin - Insync Internet Services
> > > > "Learn more, and you will never starve." - Paraphrase of Lee
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Deepak Jain wrote:
> > > > > You could always plug an FDDI card into the back of the Netedge.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Deepak.
> > ---
> >
> > "Don't go with a spineless ISP;
> >       we have more backbone."
> >
> > Alex Rubenstein -- alex () nac net -- KC2BUO -- www.nac.net
> > net @ccess corporation, 201-983-0725 -- 201-983-0725