Hi piyush, good question, as are Teddy's and most others I receive here. I don't spread wisdom, but thanks just the same. Actually my motives are just as self-serving as those asking the q's. I've learned quite a bit by exploring the answers to situations which I normally wouldn't contemplate.
Re your particular question:
"They were boasting about the fact that they had 93 private switch connections to the various other networks, and that nobody else had these. They claim that this gives better throughput to the end users coming from other networks. They mentioned that GBLX/FRO have built this super fast highway with no off ramps(the private switch connections)."
Sometimes the terminology used by networkologists doesn't have an immediate analog in general English usage, despite their seeming to be one. Such as, "off ramp."
In Internet backbone and private peering designs such as the ones being discussed here by FRO and ABOV, respectively, there exist dedicated routes of various types, some of which known as "autonamous systems" or AS's. These employ "entrance" and "exiting" strategies which are not deduced from purely intuitive means, nor are their meanings to the uninitiated fully appreciated.
If these are what the ABOV representative was referring to it would not be quite the same thing as what might otherwise be implied in a more general way as we think of on and off ramps, from an end user customer access point of view. I don't know from reading the statement you provided exactly what the intent was. But I could draw some inferences.
In any event, I would need to review both their most recent designs and get back to you. Since I myself am experiencing a bottleneck right now that could only be characterized as a form of massive congestion in my case load, that might be in a couple of days, lest I start dropping some of my own packets.
Regards, Frank Coluccio |
