nanog mailing list archives
Re: IXP - PNI
From: bmanning () vacation karoshi com
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:12:15 +0000
On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 04:52:53PM -0500, Joe Greco wrote:
On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, bmanning () vacation karoshi com wrote:the vlan tagging idea is a virtualization of the PNI construct. why use an IX when running 10's/100's/1000's of private network interconnects will do? granted, if out of the 120 ASN's at an IX, 100 are exchanging on average - 80KBs - then its likley safe to dump them all into a single physical port and vlan tag the heck out of it. its those other 20 that demand some special care.The construct also doesn't scale well for multicast traffic exchange if there's a significant number of multicast peers even though the traffic might be low for individual source ASNs. On the other hand, if the IXP doesn't use IGMP/MLD snooping capable switches, then I suppose it doesn't matter.Didn't we go through all this with ATM VC's at the AADS NAP, etc? ... JG
yes indeed. --bill
Current thread:
- RE: IXP, (continued)
- RE: IXP Ivan Pepelnjak (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Bill Woodcock (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Arnold Nipper (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP kris foster (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Arnold Nipper (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP kris foster (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI bmanning (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI Antonio Querubin (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI Joe Greco (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI bmanning (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP - PNI Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- RE: IXP Ivan Pepelnjak (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Mikael Abrahamsson (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Arnold Nipper (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Arnold Nipper (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Nathan Ward (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 18)