On Mon, 26 Jun 2000, Jessica Yu wrote:
Jessica,
> The tail circuits to the customer have the opportunity to go through
> diverse infrastructure (e.g. fiber) which would increase reliability.
So would they if I just went to two different ISP's and got them to punch
a hole in their aggregate for the netblock assigned to me from the first
ISP. [paragragh X]
> Instead of going to different POPs from the same ISP,
> the customer will be able to go to the close POPs of
> two ISPs. Therefore, the distance for the 2nd tail
> circuit can be shorter resulting money saving.
See Paragraph X.
> The customer can reach part of the Internet (at least
> customers of ISP2) without relying on ISP1.
See Paragraph X.
This also buys me the additional safety of being shielded from complete
failure of one of the upstream ISPs. With network connectivity now
becoming fundamental to doing business, I submit that there isn't a single
sensible company who would rely upon this draft under discussion for a
critical need. Instead most of them would immediately try and go for
Paragraph X. Speaking as an operator, when clients are throwing $n
million contracts at you, there is a powerful incentive to accomodate
them.
/vijay
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
