dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
18
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs to TwiztedZero

Premium Member

to TwiztedZero

Re: CNOC speed matching decision due next week

So down from 100 points of failure to 15.
Next upgrade will be down to a single point of failure.
InvalidError
join:2008-02-03

InvalidError

Member

said by MaynardKrebs:

So down from 100 points of failure to 15.
Next upgrade will be down to a single point of failure.

Too bad there most likely isn't any load-sharing/balancing in there. If there was, losing 1/15th of available capacity should have almost no impact on service.

With the much more efficient "packing" by aggregating everything on 10G links instead of individual 1Gbps virtual circuits, TSI would likely be able to get away with somewhat fewer 10G links than what their projected total of 1G links would dictate. They only need to aim for equal or more if most of their 1G links happen to frequently hit their peaks at the same time, which should be very uncommon.
34764170 (banned)
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON

34764170 (banned)

Member

said by InvalidError:

With the much more efficient "packing" by aggregating everything on 10G links instead of individual 1Gbps virtual circuits, TSI would likely be able to get away with somewhat fewer 10G links than what their projected total of 1G links would dictate. They only need to aim for equal or more if most of their 1G links happen to frequently hit their peaks at the same time, which should be very uncommon.

There is no point in reducing the amount of capacity between TSI and Rogers when they'll end up just going up to that level of required capacity very quickly anyway, especially with the increased coverage and the new speed tiers.

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium Member
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON

TwiztedZero

Premium Member

said by 34764170:

said by InvalidError:

With the much more efficient "packing" by aggregating everything on 10G links instead of individual 1Gbps virtual circuits, TSI would likely be able to get away with somewhat fewer 10G links than what their projected total of 1G links would dictate. They only need to aim for equal or more if most of their 1G links happen to frequently hit their peaks at the same time, which should be very uncommon.

There is no point in reducing the amount of capacity between TSI and Rogers when they'll end up just going up to that level of required capacity very quickly anyway, especially with the increased coverage and the new speed tiers.

I'm inclined to concurr on this assessment.