TL;DR: Not worth it unless you have only a few transit providers and are a 
content-heavy network with little inbound traffic.

We used the Internap FCP for a long time (10 or so years). In general, we were 
satisfied with it, but honestly, after not having it in our network for the 
past year and a half, we really don't notice a difference. We primarily 
purchased it to keep transit costs down, but as we kept boosting our minimums 
with providers, it became less and less about transit costs and more about 
performance.

Boxes like these really work best if your network is a content-heavy network 
(more outbound than inbound). Sure, it will route around poorly performing 
paths, but IMO it's not worth the money and yearly maintenance fees just for 
this. I always said that it must be doing a good job since we never got 
complaints about packet loss in an upstream network, but now that the device is 
gone, we still don't get complaints about packet loss in an upstream's network. 
:-/

The biggest problem that we found was that it just was not actively developed 
(at the time, not sure about now). New software features were non-existent for 
years. Bugs were not fixed in a timely manner. Given what we were paying in 
yearly maintenance fees, it just wasn't worth it to keep around. It also wasn't 
scalable as we kept adding more transit interfaces, given that there were a 
fixed amount of capture ports. Adding non-transit peering into the mix was also 
complicated and messed with the route decision algorithms. Maybe things have 
changed.

As far as technicals, it seemed to work fine. One of the really only annoying 
things about it were remote users who think that a UDP packet hitting their 
firewall from its automatic traceroute mechanism were 'DDoS' and threats of 
lawyers/the wrath of god almighty would come down upon us for sending 
unauthorized packets to their precious and delicate network. You would 
definitely also want to make sure that you filter announcements so you don't 
accidentally start sending longer paths to your upstreams or customer peers, 
but if you run BGP, you already do that, amirite?!

-evt

> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Paras
> Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 3:04 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Internap route optimization
> 
> Does anyone know or have any experience with Internap's route
> optimization? Is it any good?
> 
> I've heard of competing solutions as well, such as the one provided by
> Noction.
> 
> Thanks for your input,
> Paras

Reply via email to