nanog mailing list archives

Re: Traffic Engineering


From: Josh Beck <jbeck () connectnet com>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 1997 12:23:38 -0700 (PDT)

It's my analysis that the problem is that small (T-1 and below)
customers should be buying their connectivity from (and there should
_be_, for them to buy it from) a local exchange-type provider.  IE: buy
a T-3 up hill to, oh, say, the top 6 or 10 backbones, and then sell
transit to local ISPs and IAPs in your geographic area.

This doesn't seem to be technically difficult, and it seems like it
ought to be pretty easy to sell... sure, you're one hop further from
the backbone... but you're now two hops away from _10_.

Are there any major potholes in this theory that I'm missing?

        A big problem here is that ISPs differentiate themselves based on
who they buy bandwidth from. An ISP that has a T1 to CRL, say, benefits
greatly when a larger competitor gets a T1 to CRL as well, but the larger
competitor doesn't benefit if they already have multiple T1s and T3s to
the larger backbones themselves. A better idea is a miniature NAP for the
ISPs in each large metropolitan area for exchanging local traffic.

Josh Beck - CONNECTnet Network Operations Center - jbeck () connectnet com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CONNECTnet INS, Inc.      Phone: (619)450-0254       Fax: (619)450-3216
6370 Lusk Blvd., Suite F-208                        San Diego, CA 92121
-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Current thread: