Re: Traffic Engineering

[Gordon Cook <cook () netaxs com>]

well if I may stick my two cents in from a rainy russian sankt
peterburg, I disagree.  Sure the majority of my traffic is not local and I
do business with my newsletter all over the world/  But I will not be
entirely happy with the internet until i have  a locally usable conncetion
to my township city hall where I and my fellow citizens can debate local
politics. I want the same connection to my local school board and internet
using teachers.  the same to my county commissioners and my state
legislature.  I want email to the local library and use of its web site.
I want access to local transportation schedules and local businesses and
restaurant menus.  and yes maybe even to the local pizza parlor.   as long
as we live in **physical places** and pay taxes to local governments, the
internet will not make local geography entirely irrelevant.

I cannot predict exact percentages but I know with certainty there is a
LOT of local communication the *I* would like to do that I cannot.
Given an increase in the density of local users  local traffic will surely
increase.

***********************************************************************
The COOK Report on Internet               For subsc. pricing & more than
431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA     ten megabytes of free material
(609) 882-2572 (phone & fax)              visit   http://cookreport.com/
Internet: cook () cookreport com             New Special Report: Internet
Governance at the Crossroads ($175)  http://cookreport.com/inetgov.shtml
************************************************************************


On Wed, 17 Sep 1997, Paul Ferguson wrote:

> At 04:23 PM 9/17/97 -0700, Pushpendra Mohta wrote:
>
> > Even in the scenario where physical proximity automatically implied
> > network proximity, I think the assumption that local traffic will
> > dominate communications needs to be revisited. It is true today, only
> > because that is how people live lives and conduct business _today_. The
> > concept of "community" today is geographical.. the communities of
> > tommorrow may not be so restricted.
>
> I'm not at all convinced that 'local' traffic stays 'local', in fact,
> I'd suspect that the latter case which you mention is already true.
>
> I'd very much like to see the ration of traffic which is 'pushed' to
> that which is 'pulled' from the local exchange, especially at smaller
> exchanges (e.g. Tucson, Packet Clearing House) to verify these
> assumptions. Not sure enough solid data can be correlated at the
> larger exchange points to provide a conclusion.
>
> - paul