IP: Ugly Traffic Jams will soon Bring Highway Tolls to the

[Dave Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>]

sent to me by an IPer


UGLY TRAFFIC JAMS WILL SOON BRING HIGHWAY TOLLS TO THE INTERNET


By STEVE G. STEINBERG


I THOUGHT it would be a simple matter when, two weeks ago, I started
looking for a map of the Internet. I just wanted a diagram that showed
the main pathways of the Net, the fiber-optic cables that crisscross
the country carrying World Wide Web pages from San Francisco to Dallas
and electronic mail from Los Angeles to New York. I thought that if I
knew what the Net looked like, I might be able to determine if we are
about to run out of network capacity, as some pundits have predicted
recently.


I still haven't found a map. In fact, I no longer think one exists. It
turns out that the companies that operate the main arteries of the
Internet consider detailed information about their piece of the
network to be proprietary. It's a strange situation, almost as if
states refused to disclose details about how many highways they have
and where they are located because it was considered competitive
information.


Nonetheless, from talking to the engineers who are building and
maintaining the Internet, I've been able to piece together, if not a
map of the Net, at least an outline of its shape. Enough to determine
that the roads that make up the Internet are almost running at full
capacity and traffic jams are becoming increasingly frequent. And
that, although this condition will exist only until the infrastructure
is improved, the tremendous growth in Internet traffic is prompting
fundamental changes in the underlying economics of the network.


Increasingly, we're going to hear about ''settlements,'' whereby small
Internet providers pay larger ones in order to traverse their
networks.  This may be the death knell for many of them. To understand
why, you need to understand the Internet's structure. Which brings us
back to the missing map.


 A SIMPLE BACKBONE


A few years ago, a map of the Net would have been easy to draw. The
Internet's backbone -- the main pipes that carry data across the
country -- was owned and operated by the National Science Foundation,
a federal government agency. This backbone, capable of carrying 45
megabits per second, connected a few dozen important scientific sites
like the San Diego Supercomputing Center, UC-Berkeley and the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.


Also connected to the backbone were regional access providers like
CERFNet in Southern California and NEARNet on the East Coast. These
regional networks provided Internet service to thousands of smaller
sites and simply fed data that needed to go across the country to the
NSF backbone.


But in April 1995, the NSF, having decided to turn the Internet
business over to the private sector, turned off its backbone, and
suddenly mapping the network became a much murkier business. Instead
of one backbone, there are now almost a dozen, and instead of a few
regional providers, there are now a few thousand small-time Internet
providers.


COMPETITIVE DATA LINES


The two largest backbones are operated by SprintLink and InternetMCI,
but backbones run by companies such as AlterNet (which is partnered
with Microsoft) and Advanced Network & Services (which was bought by
America Online in 1994) are becoming increasingly important. All of
these backbones are made up of what are known as DS-3 lines, capable
of handling data at a speed of 45 megabits per second.


But nobody knows the total number of DS-3 lines being used to carry
Internet traffic, or exactly what cities they run between, which makes
it hard to say how much traffic the Internet can really support. And
an even more important implication of having multiple backbones comes
from the necessary interconnections. After all, if my computer is
connected to SprintLink, and Microsoft is connected to AlterNet, how
can we send messages back and forth?


The answer lies in NAPs, or Network Access Points. These are locations
where the big Internet providers get together and exchange data. For
example, Pacific Bell operates an NAP in Oakland that some 20 Internet
backbones and major service providers connect to. In the scenario
above, my message to Microsoft would be sent via our connection to
SprintLink from San Francisco to Oakland. Then, at the PacBell Network
Access Point, it would be switched onto AlterNet's network and carried
up to Seattle.


THE BURDEN VARIES


This works fine if everyone is exchanging equal amounts of data. But
in reality, the smaller players end up dumping most of their traffic
onto the big networks, while the big players end up handling most of
their own traffic. Not surprisingly, the big guys see this as unfair.


They have ignored the matter up to now because, as one Sprint engineer
put it, ''the traffic volumes were so small it just looked like a
rounding error.'' But as volumes swell, and as network capacity grows
tighter, it seems very likely that a system of payments will be
instituted, whereby small providers have to pay for the privilege of
exchanging data. That may sound reasonable, but expect to hear screams
of outrage. The Internet provider business carries very low margins,
and the introduction of settlements is likely to drive some of the
smaller fish right out of the pond.


Nonetheless, as Bob Collet, president of the Commercial Internet
Exchange, points out, ''the telephone system has relied on a system of
settlements for years. Sure, Internet folks are used to getting things
for free, but that's just not going to last.''


Pushpendra Mohta, executive director of CERFNet, agrees. ''We're large
enough that we don't need to pay settlements, but you will probably
start seeing smaller regional providers being asked to pay settlements
this year.''


This may very well be the most important outcome of the approaching
Internet capacity crunch. I don't believe that the Web will collapse
from lack of bandwidth. By next year, companies like Cisco Systems and
Ipsilon Networks will have developed the equipment necessary to run
Internet backbones at speeds as high as 622 megabits per second. But
until then, watch out for an increasing number of toll roads.


Steve G. Steinberg (steve () wired com) is an editor at Wired magazine.


     MERCURY CENTER ID: me48652t -- Transmitted:  96-01-29 05:01:17 ES