(caution, I'm just a chemical engineer, but) You appear to ask one question: "What is the difference between flow and non-flow architectures?" then sideline in some discussion about fiber/waves vs layer-3/transit/peering/x-connect
I don't think the second part really relates to the first part of your message. (I didn't put this content in-line because .. it's mostly trying to clarify what you are asking Rod" On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 3:19 AM Rod Beck <rod.b...@unitedcablecompany.com> wrote: > > Please explain for us dumb sales guys the distinction between flow and > non-flow. My question is the fundamental architecture of these clouds. We all > know that Amazon is buying dark fiber and building a network based on > lighting 100 and 10 gig waves on IRU and titled fiber. Same for Microsoft (I > sold them in a past life some waves) and other large players. > > But there appear to be quite a few cloud players that rely heavily on Layer 3 > purchased from Level3 (CenturyLink) and other members of the august Tier 1 > club. And many CDN players are really transit + real estate operations as was > Akamai until recently. > > It seems the threshold for moving from purchased transit plus peering to a > Layer 1 and 2 network has risen over time. Many former Tier 2 ISPs pretty > much gutted their private line networks as transit prices continued > inexorable declines. > > Best, > > Roderick. > > ________________________________ > From: NANOG <nanog-boun...@nanog.org> on behalf of Glen Kent > <glen.k...@gmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, February 9, 2020 11:02 AM > To: nanog@nanog.org <nanog@nanog.org> > Subject: Flow based architecture in data centers(more specifically Telco > Clouds) > > Hi, > > Are most of the Telco Cloud deployments envisioned to be modeled on a flow > based or a non flow based architecture? I am presuming that for deeper > insights into the traffic one would need a flow based architecture, but that > can have scale issues (# of flows, flow setup rates, etc) and was hence > checking. > > Thanks, Glen
