BCP for multisite multihoming

[John Payne]

On Jul 23, 2007, at 10:33 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum  
<iljitsch at muada.com> wrote:

> On 21-jul-2007, at 10:27, John Payne wrote:
>
>> Geo addressing sounds interesting on the surface, but every  
>> proposal seems to require a new economic model. I find it difficult  
>> to believe that will happen anytime soon.
>
> As the saying goes, there are many ways to skin a cat. If you hand  
> over the packets with destinations in a certain region to an entity  
> that handles that region, such as an internet exchange, then you're  
> indeed using a different economical model than we use today.
>
> But you can also do all the geo stuff in your own network. For  
> instance, if you have a world wide network, you could split the  
> world into 10 pieces and handle routing for each of those regions  
> only within the region. The other regions then use an aggregate to  
> get the packets to the right region. You would of course have to  
> peer with other networks within these regions or break aggregation.  
> But then, if you have a world wide network you're almost certainly  
> peering in more than 10 places as it is anyway.

Yes... But I'm probably also very selective who I peer with at those  
10 locations. Under the geo model, I have to pretty much peer with  
everyone, everywhere.


>
>
>> The other problem with using IXs that immediately comes to mind is  
>> that you are essentially multihoming to a single piece of  
>> infrastructure. Not really resilient in my mind :)
>
> Exchanges are often layer 2 networks, which aren't very resilient.  
> But money and engineering talent can fix these problems.

Who's money?