nanog mailing list archives
Re: IXP
From: bmanning () vacation karoshi com
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:09:00 +0000
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 05:30:41AM +0000, Stephen Stuart wrote:
Not sure how switches handle HOL blocking with QinQ traffic across trunks, but hey... what's the fun of running an IXP without testing some limits?Indeed. Those with longer memories will remember that I used to regularly apologize at NANOG meetings for the DEC Gigaswitch/FDDI head-of-line blocking that all Gigaswitch-based IXPs experienced when some critical mass of OC3 backbone circuits was reached and the 100 MB/s fabric rolled over and died, offered here (again) as a cautionary tale for those who want to test those particular limits (again).
Ohhh... Scary Stories! :)
The real lesson from the last fifteen or so years, though, is that bear skins and stone knives clearly have a long operational lifetime.
well... while there is a certain childlike obession with the byzantine, rube-goldburg, lots of bells, knobs, whistles type machines... for solid, predictable performance, simple clean machines work best.
Stephen
--bill
Current thread:
- Re: IXP, (continued)
- Re: IXP Randy Bush (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Matthew Moyle-Croft (Apr 17)
- RE: IXP Deepak Jain (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Stephen Stuart (Apr 17)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP bmanning (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP bmanning (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Steven M. Bellovin (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Paul Vixie (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP bmanning (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Jack Bates (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Dale Carstensen (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Steven M. Bellovin (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Paul Ferguson (Apr 18)
- Re: IXP Roland Dobbins (Apr 18)