nanog mailing list archives
Re: ip-precedence for management traffic
From: Michael Thomas <mike () mtcc com>
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 06:50:37 -0800
David Hiers wrote:
If the world wants an internet that is as predictable and reliable as the PSTN, it'll bear the cost of protecting the control plane. A fundamental choice in the protection scheme is physical architecture. IB or OOB, it's always a good thing to be explicit in design decisions, and not adopt legacy/heritage decisions without consideration.
What's the "control plane" anyway? It includes google, right? Mike
Current thread:
- Re: ip-precedence for management traffic, (continued)
- Re: ip-precedence for management traffic David Conrad (Dec 29)
- Re: ip-precedence for management traffic Randy Bush (Dec 29)
- Re: ip-precedence for management traffic Michael Thomas (Dec 29)
- Re: ip-precedence for management traffic Jared Mauch (Dec 29)
- RE: ip-precedence for management traffic Sachs, Marcus Hans (Marc) (Dec 29)
- Re: ip-precedence for management traffic Dorn Hetzel (Dec 29)
- Re: ip-precedence for management traffic Paul Ferguson (Dec 31)
- Re: ip-precedence for management traffic Michael Thomas (Dec 30)