nanog mailing list archives
Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future
From: Jeff Wheeler <jsw () inconcepts biz>
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 14:11:34 -0400
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com> wrote:
there's probably a different need in TOR and BO/SOHO locations than core devices, eh?
In today's backbone, this is certainly true. Feature-driven upgrades shouldn't be much of a factor for "P boxes" today, because modern networks have the option of simply label-switching in the core (just like 1990s networks could ATM/Frame-switch) without doing much of anything else. Feature-driven upgrades should be largely confined to "PE boxes." For the same reason, upgrading a P box should be easy, not hard. After all, it's just label-switching. In today's backbones, it should be more practical than ever to buy the most cost-effective box needed for now and the predictable near-term. Cost per gigabit continues to fall. Buying dramatically more capacity than is planned to be necessary sinks capital dollars into a box that does nothing but depreciate. I realize that organizationally-painful budgeting and purchasing processes often drive networks to buy the biggest thing available. Vendors understand this, too: they love to sell you a much bigger box than you need just because upgrading is hard to get approved so you don't want to do it any more frequently than necessary, even when that behavior is detrimental to cash-flow and bottom line. The more broken your organization, the more you need to spend extra money on "too big" boxes. Sounds pretty self-defeating, doesn't it? -- Jeff S Wheeler <jsw () inconcepts biz> Sr Network Operator / Innovative Network Concepts
Current thread:
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future, (continued)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future William Herrin (Mar 11)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Owen DeLong (Mar 11)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future William Herrin (Mar 11)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Joel Jaeggli (Mar 11)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future William Herrin (Mar 12)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Vadim Antonov (Mar 12)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Joel Jaeggli (Mar 12)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future William Herrin (Mar 12)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Jeff Wheeler (Mar 12)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Christopher Morrow (Mar 13)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Jeff Wheeler (Mar 13)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Christopher Morrow (Mar 13)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Jeff Wheeler (Mar 13)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future William Herrin (Mar 13)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Randy Bush (Mar 09)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Joel Jaeggli (Mar 09)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Randy Bush (Mar 09)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Antonio Querubin (Mar 09)
- Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future Joel Jaeggli (Mar 09)