Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: UBR at MAE-East ATM, anyone?

  • From: Alex Rubenstein
  • Date: Tue Apr 18 13:06:08 2000


Yes.

To me, it seems that WCom is policing the amount of traffic one can shove
into a ATM port, so the giga-fiasco doesn't occur again, which I guess is
somewhat of a legitmate cause. However, the difference between the giga
and the atm solution is (obviously) there is no such thing as
'head-of-line' blocking on the ATM.

Moving to the UBR will allow you to more smartly fill your pipe, and not
have arbitrary restrictions on the flows you send in; essentially, the
bottle neck with the PCR = 2 * SCR is the PVC, not the port. Considering
the nature of internet traffic, this seems silly.

However, the ability to build multiple PVC's in parallel from/to the same
ports is important to us, and BeerMaker allows us to do this; we'd like to
not lose this functionality. 





On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Lauren F. Nowlin wrote:

> Thanks for your update Steve and to Alex for getting the ball rolling.
> 
> ONYX would also like to see this change implemented.
> 
> The model the AADS team uses is far superior to any other scheme to 
> 'monitor' interactions between peers at the PVC level.  Hands-off full mesh 
> build is the easiest to activate rapidly without botched PVCs trickling in 
> one-by-one or stuck in a random queue of a departed employee...  The 
> PeerMaker method is too human intensive for little to no gain from an 
> operational sense.  A negative if you can't use the capacity for fear of 
> artificial caps being exceeded with other peers, which is the case noted 
> below.
> 
> Also, I've never understood why PBNAP PVC build requests between two 
> customers - approved by both customers - have to be sent to PacBell 
> Marketing for approval...
> 
> Alex, let me know if I can help your efforts in any way.
> 
> Thanks again,
> -Ren
> 
> At 10:15 PM 4/17/00 -0700, Steve Feldman wrote:
> 
> >When I left wcom, there was a project starting to
> >implement an option to provision UBR PVCs.
> >It required non-trivial changes to Peermaker,
> >so would take some time.
> >
> >I'll let the current MAE crew answer as to current state,
> >availability, etc.
> >         Steve
> >
> >On Mon, Apr 17, 2000 at 10:37:17PM -0400, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I've been talking to the WCom MAE folk, and the explained to me that the
> > > the VC's between beers are built as ABR, with PCR being twice SCR. Also,
> > > the port you lease from them has a non-oversubscription policy, i.e., the
> > > sum of all SCR's combined cannot be more than port speed.
> > >
> > > >From what I can tell, PBNap and Ameritech both build the VC's as UBR, with
> > > no over-allocation protection.
> > >
> > > In my travels of contacting other providers for peer information, I have
> > > run across about 5 (albeit out of about 60 who responded) that said they
> > > couldn't turn up new VC's across MAE-East ATM, because they have reached
> > > thier subscription allocation, even though thier port is not nearly full.
> > > A few had even expressed they wish that it was the ameritech-like UBR
> > > model.
> > >
> > > One person who I spoke to at WCom had said that maybe someday they would
> > > allow UBR PVCs, but there was no timeline.
> > >
> > > What are other people's thoughts on this?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> 
> 
> -Ren
> 
> Lauren F. Nowlin, ren@onyx.net
> Director, Peering - peering@onyx.net
> ONYX Networks - http://www.onyx.net/peering/
> Office: 650-558-3262,  Fax: 650-558-3160, Cell: 650-281-6963
> 
> 






Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.