Re: How big is the Internet?

[Warren Bailey <wbailey () satelliteintelligencegroup com>]

Is internal DNS considered to be in the same realm? I agree with you, but
I'm not totally sure there is a straight forward answer here.

Device connected to internet, sends query (same as would be over the
internet) to local DNS service. Is that an Internet transaction?

On 8/15/13 1:10 PM, "Leo Bicknell" <bicknell () ufp org> wrote:

> On Aug 15, 2013, at 1:27 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick () ianai net> wrote:
>
> > My laptop at home is an edge node under the definition above, despite
> > being behind a NAT. My home NAS is as well. When I back up my laptop to
> > my NAS over my home network, that traffic would be counted as "Internet"
> > traffic by your definition.
> >
> > I have a feeling that does not come close to matching the mental model
> > most people have in their head of "Internet traffic". But maybe I'm
> > confused.
>
> It matches my mental model.  Your network is connected to the Internet,
> that's traffic between two hosts, it's Internet traffic.
>
> Let's take the same two machines, but I own one and you own one, and
> let's put them on the same network behind a NAT just like your home, but
> at a coffee shop.  Rather than backups we're both running bit torrent and
> our two machines exchange data.
>
> That's Internet traffic, isn't it?  Two unrelated people talking over the
> network?  They just happen to be on the same LAN.
>
> My definition was arbitrary, so feel free to argue another arbitrary
> definition is more useful in some way, but for my arbitrary definition
> you've applied the rules correct, and I would argue it's the right way to
> think about things.  In a broad english sense "IP packets traversing an
> Internet connected network are Internet traffic".
>
> It's all graph cross sections.  "Peering" volume totals a set of
> particular links in the graph, omitting traffic from your laptop to your
> file server, or your NAS to your laptop.  My model attempts to isolate
> every edge on the graph, and generate the total sum of IP traffic
> crossing any Internet connected network, which would always include all
> forms of local caches (Akamai, Google, Netflix) and even your NAT.  I
> think that's a more interesting number, and a number that's easier to
> count and defend than say a peering or "backbone" number.
>
> -- 
>       Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440
>        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/