nanog mailing list archives
Re: Agenda for next NANOG
From: Guy T Almes <almes () advanced org>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 09:33:41 -0400
Randy, There is a cluster of closely-related variants on the issue you raise: [] to what extent does a given exchange point (NAP/MAE/etc) constrain the performance that a user sees (in what a user thinks of as end- to-end). For example, an FTP could flow at 800 kb/s for a given pair of users, except that MAE-north is congested, so the FTP can only flow at 400 kb/s. [] to what extent does a given exchange point constrain the performance that a provider sees (in what a provider thinks of as end-to-end). For example, a given pair of backbones could sustain 20 Mb/s over a private interconnect with acceptable packet loss, but can only sustain 10 Mb/s over the Altoona NAP.
Current thread:
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Guy T Almes (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Randy Bush (Sep 03)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Guy T Almes (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Sean Doran (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG John Hawkinson (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Curtis Villamizar (Sep 03)
- RE: Agenda for next NANOG Peter Ford (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG bmanning (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG John Hawkinson (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Avi Freedman (Sep 04)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG bmanning (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Craig Labovitz (Sep 04)
(Thread continues...)