re: Internap Rolls Up Route Optimizers>>board) offer switching products that balance >>traffic on access links on a packet-by-packet >>basis.
on a packet-by-packet basis???. won't they have a packet re-ordering problem ? isn't this the same kind of load balancing idea that bit Juniper's behind a while ago ?
re: Internap Rolls Up Route OptimizersIn a macro sense, is MPLS not a form of load balancing? That seems to be hot. Maybe that is all that is needed, especially if the "Access link" is optical.
re: Internap Rolls Up Route OptimizersLooking for some insight on these guys.....I own their stock, but I am not sure what to expect out of them any more.....can any one predict a 6 month price and 12 month price.
re: Internap Rolls Up Route Optimizers| green said "won't they have a packet re-ordering | problem ?" | | They probably do the load balancing per flow, i.e. per | Source/destination address. | | AAL5
AAL5 is correct. Most of the "route control" vendors, to varying degrees, do some form of passive flow analysis coupled with a small amount of "active probing" on the alternative paths. They then route the traffic over a preferred egress as defined by a policy. The policy might be weighted towards pure performance or 'cost balancing' (to smooth out 95th percentile billing per provider). The egress change is typically made by modifying iBGP localpref via their route server.
on a packet-by-packet basis???. won't they have a packet re-ordering problem ? isn't this the same kind of load balancing idea that bit Juniper's behind a while ago ?