Outline

1
Outline

• Overview
• Examples
• Rina Samani, JAnet
• Rene Hatem, CAnet3
• James Williams, Indiana Univ / TransPAC
• Summary and Q/A

2
Abilene coreNovember 2000
Seattle
New York
Cleveland
Indianapolis
Sacramento
Washington
Denver
Kansas City
Los Angeles
Atlanta
Houston
3
Abilene Connectionsby (roughly) Mar-2001
4
Abilene Peering
26 October 2000
STTL CAnet3, (AARnet)
(ANSP), APAN/TransPAC, Canet3, CERN, CERnet,
IUCC, NORDUnet, RENATER2, REUNA2, (RNP2),
SURFnet, SingAREN, SINET, TAnet2
NYCM TEN-155, JANET, NORDUnet, SURFnet
CAnet3 (HEAnet, BELNET)
SNVA (SINET, GEMNET)
LOSA SingAREN, SINET (HARNET?)
CALREN2 CUDI
AmPATH (REUNA, RNP2, RETINA?)
UT El Paso (CUDI)
ARNES, BELNET, CARNET, CESnet, DFN, GRNET,
HEAnet, RESTENA, SWITCH, HUNGARNET, GARR-B,
POL-34, RCCN, RedIRIS
5
Challenges

• We can achieve excellent performance within each
  of our advanced R/E networks
• Can we do so internationally?

6
Progress in New York City

• Situation in Fall 2000
• All peering via Abilene/Teleglobe LS1010s and
  OC12
• Performance limits interface card / switch
  settings
• New Developments
• Dante OC12 POS
• Janet OC3 ATM, but bypass of cell-limiting
  switches
• Other POS Connections Planned
• Early planning for improved facilities for
  multilateral peering

7
West Coast Developments

• Peering with SingAREN in Los Angeles
• New Router Node in Sunnyvale
• New Peering with CAnet3 in Seattle
• GigE switch hosted by PNW GigaPoP
• Planning on peering also with AARnet

8
Other Developments

• Early planning of improved peering in Chicago
• Approaching AmPath
• Improving peering with CAnet3 / CUDI
• ITN transit, in cooperation with CAnet3 and
  StarTap, proving a success

9
Summary

• 4-port OC12 POS cards improve performance in New
  York
• Early experience with gigE switches
• Increased attention to End-to-End Performance
• ITN