[asterisk-users] Teliax Quality of Service

[Stephen Bosch]

Douglas Garstang wrote:
> Yes, all the equipment was located at the same physical location. In
> hindsight, we could have multi-homed our collocations. Why can't service
> providers multi home their edge systems to accept incoming calls from
> two physical locations? If a service provider did this, they would have
> two completely independent facilities, potentially thousands of miles
> apart, connected to different upstream providers. I can't think of
> anything short of nuclear war that would destroy their ability to accept
> calls. If they did least cost routing, it wouldn't even matter if their
> providers failed. China gets hit by a meteor and NO provider can deliver
> calls to China? Fine... at least you can still call everywhere else.

Because all this extra expense still doesn't protect you from "last mile
failures". If the Internet were perfectly distributed and each node had
connections to half a dozen other nodes, then maybe this would make
sense, but a large amount of traffic still goes through single points of
failure, even on the big Internet (Case in point -- traffic from Seattle
to New York still goes through a single path south through California,
across the southwest, then up and over via Illinois). When that path
breaks (and it has) absolutely *everything* breaks.

It's no different in the PSTN. Some people are in the fortunate position
of being in areas that can be multiple-provisioned, but millions of
people live at the network edge where that's of questionable value.

I admire your CLECs redundancy; the security you perceive it gave you,
however, is illusory.

-Stephen-