nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution)
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2005 11:10:26 -0400
On Oct 8, 2005, at 7:02 AM, David Schwartz wrote:
Various people have stated that uneven data flows (e.g. frommostly-content networks to mostly-eyeball networks) is a good reason tonot peer.I think the industry simply needs to accept that it's more expensive toreceive traffic than to send it.
But it is not.It is more expensive to carry a large packet a long way than to carry a small packet a long way. Because of things like hot-potato routing, that frequently means the sender has less cost than the receiver, depending on where they meet.
The rest of your argument is based on the premise that none of this is changeable. Which is clearly wrong.
"Receivers" have been de-peering "Senders" for over half a decade. (I.e. "Forever" in Internet time.) These fights have been fixed by things like sending MEDs or intentionally recruiting customers to balance traffic for a long, long time.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with an eyeball network saying "I'll carry it, gimme gimme!" But that doesn't mean they have to.
Yes, that can't possibly work. It's way too simple and actually makessense.
No, it can't work because you assume things which are not necessarily factual. Not to mention, it doesn't make sense.
-- TTFN, patrick
Current thread:
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering, (continued)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Mikael Abrahamsson (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Stephen J. Wilcox (Oct 07)
- Cogent/Level 3 Contracts (was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering) William Allen Simpson (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 Contracts (was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering) Stephen J. Wilcox (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 Contracts (was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering) Michael . Dillon (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 Contracts (was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering) Stephen J. Wilcox (Oct 08)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 Contracts (was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering) William Allen Simpson (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 Contracts (was: Cogent/Level 3 depeering) Stephen J. Wilcox (Oct 08)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 07)
- RE: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) David Schwartz (Oct 08)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 08)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) Paul Vixie (Oct 09)
- RE: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) David Schwartz (Oct 10)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) William B. Norton (Oct 10)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) Paul Vixie (Oct 10)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 06)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Jay Adelson (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Joe Maimon (Oct 07)