[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
IXP
On 24.04.2009 03:48 Paul Vixie wrote
> "Bill Woodcock" <woody at pch.net> writes:
>
>> ... Nobody's arguing against VLANs. Paul's argument was that VLANs
>> rendered shared subnets obsolete, and everybody else has been rebutting
>> that. Not saying that VLANs shouldn't be used.
>
> i think i saw several folks, not just stephen, say virtual wire was how
> they'd do an IXP today if they had to start from scratch. i know that
> for many here, starting from scratch isn't a reachable worldview, and so
> i've tagged most of the defenses of shared subnets with that caveat. the
> question i was answering was from someone starting from scratch, and when
> starting an IXP from scratch, a shared subnet would be just crazy talk.
I like to disagree here, Paul.
Best regards,
Arnold
--
Arnold Nipper / nIPper consulting, Sandhausen, Germany
email: arnold at nipper.de phone: +49 6224 9259 299
mobile: +49 172 2650958 fax: +49 6224 9259 333
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20090424/8461ab2a/attachment.bin>
- References:
- IXP
- From: bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com (bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com)
- IXP
- From: stuart at tech.org (Stephen Stuart)
- IXP
- From: woody at pch.net (Bill Woodcock)
- IXP
- From: vixie at isc.org (Paul Vixie)