Hi,
this may be a OOO..LD topic which is talked, discussed
or agrued for year. ISP networks may need to be
optimized continuously. But, it seems people have
different view of optimization when they use this word
at different place; sometimes optimization means
adding more access router, add
On Sun, 02 Oct 2005 15:47:22 +0800, Joe Shen said:
Is there a common sense on the target of network
optimization? or is there common startup line of such
work? What should be the model of a optimized ISP
network ( or PoP site) ?
You want to optimize for the lowest monetary cost network that
Thanks for the response.
You want to optimize for the lowest monetary cost
network that still allows you
to meet all the SLA's you've negotiated. And this
depends on what you
negotiated - for instance, if the SLA specifies 3
9's of reliability, spending
money to build a 4 9's network
It occurred unintentionally during an email account subscription change to
NANOG.
My bad :(
PS -
Randy Bush, is this any better? I.e., any more Microsog noise, herein?
Frank
--- Austin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's worth noting that C's don't need actual IP
address space assigned to
the router-id for OSPF. It's just an arbitrary
value; it's probably better
karma to set it to whatever you want (maybe
something that doesn't look
like an IP address).
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
eek! There are a couple of downsides to having the
router-ID divorced from a physical address:
1) you get an additional number which you have to have
to track to ensure uniqueness.
2) you lose the benefit of being able to double check
reachability (ping/ssh to
