Re: The questions stand

[Scott Gardner Anderson <gardner () interport net>]

On Thu, 21 May 1998, Karl Denninger wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 1998 at 12:44:11AM -0400, John Fraizer - Administrator wrote:
> > Lets see how they are performing today, shall we?
> > [somebox]:~# traceroute customer.of.blah-12345-we-are-a-nap.net
[snip]
> > Wow.  Now, that's some lightning speed. <sic>
> > And NOW, lets look at someone with a real Tier One provider:
> > [somebox]:~# traceroute www.mcs.net
> > traceroute: Warning: Multiple interfaces found; using x.x.x.x @ eth0
> > traceroute to www.mcs.net (205.164.8.12), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
> >  1  (Default Gateway) (x.x.x.1)  0.495 ms  0.415 ms  0.385 ms
> >  2  (Tier One provider) (x.x.x.21)  2.424 ms  1.630 ms  1.529 ms
> >  3  aads.good.net (198.32.130.49)  15.131 ms  13.261 ms  13.930 ms
> >  4  mcsnet.chicago.good.net (207.98.189.130)  14.775 ms  15.296 ms  16.193 ms
> >  5  www.mcs.net (205.164.8.12)  14.592 ms  14.750 ms  14.504 ms
> > BTW: Karl, lightning fast as always to your site.
>
> Then again, my background and engineering efforts have been geared towards
> the Fortune-50 marketplace and OLTP environments where ANY packet loss or
> significant hysteresis in the transport times is considered unacceptable.
Seems to depend on where you sit.  John is only a few hops away (on the
same 'Tier 1' provider?) as Karl, so traffic is dependant on only three
parties maintaining a clean network.  Across another backbone (via public
view sage.aspire.net) it's not so clean, probably due to packet loss
across the Tier 1 provider that they use (UUNet) or loss at an exchange
point between UUNet and Napnet to get to Karl's network.

----205.164.8.12 PING Statistics----
15 packets transmitted, 13 packets received, 13% packet loss
round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 40/52/190

Meanwhile, it's clean from where I sit:
----205.164.8.12 PING Statistics----
21 packets transmitted, 21 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 85/96/299

and Aspire is clean from here:
----sage.aspire.net PING Statistics----
16 packets transmitted, 16 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 23/30/54

but I see loss from NetAxs to me:
----199.184.165.2 PING Statistics----
24 packets transmitted, 22 packets received, 8% packet loss
round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 29/48/70

while it's clean from NetAxs to MCS:
----www.mcs.net PING Statistics----
17 packets transmitted, 17 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip (ms)  min/avg/max = 22/26/37

Despite our best intentions, packet loss and delay will always exists from
our networks to certain destinations, no matter whether we use 'Tier 1'
providers or companies that are creating private NAPs of their own.  And
how it looks from me to you doesn't mean much, in the long run - how it
looks across the board from you to your customer's destinations is what
makes a difference.  If that's accomplished with a small backbone
provider, a big player like MCI, or some local 'private nap' company
shouldn't make any difference to anyone but yourself. 

SGA