- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: BigISP<-->SmallISP peerings
by Vadim Antonov 26 Oct '96

26 Oct '96

Zachary DeAquila <zachary(a)zachs.place.org> wrote: >Hrm. Does it matter if the small ISP already has transit with someone else? >In such a case, peering does nothing but shorten the path from SmallISP to >BigISP in order to no longer make it go through SmallISPs transit provider. Yes, but then from the point of view of large ISP the peering is of zero value. You see, it has to deliver packets to IXP anyway. OTOH, the load on routers, bloated configurations and engineering resources to support the additional peering are quite real. --vadim

3 2

Re: BigISP<-->SmallISP peerings
by Vadim Antonov 26 Oct '96

26 Oct '96

>> Yes, but then from the point of view of large ISP the peering is of zero >> value. You see, it has to deliver packets to IXP anyway. OTOH, the >> load on routers, bloated configurations and engineering resources to >> support the additional peering are quite real. >Not quite zero - if you have direct Small/Big vs Small/Transit/Big, >then you bypass any potential problems with Transit. > --asp(a)partan.com (Andrew Partan) Well, but then you get problems with Small being sloppy with what they announce. Transit is large and supposedly is clueful enough (and have resources to develop tools) to ensure some sanity of routing information. Overall, the balance of problems is still zero; but the risk that your other business will be harmed is less in case of transit. --vadim

1 0

Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re:
by Vadim Antonov 26 Oct '96

26 Oct '96

Michael Dillon <michael(a)memra.com> wrote: >When you look at the relationship between two entire species like rabbits >and wolves it begins to look even more like cooperation where the rabbits >cooperate by providing food for the wolves and the wolves cooperate by NOT >WIPING OUT THE ENTIRE RABBIT POPULATION! Now, let's imagine that wolves learned to eat grass and started to enjoy it. What they do then is simply catch and eat all rabbits -- to eliminate competition for grass. Of course, some rabbits may be real quick-pawed (hint, hint). >It's called balance. It is bound to shift. --vadim

1 0

Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations
by William Allen Simpson 26 Oct '96

26 Oct '96

> From: azeem(a)dial.pipex.com (Azeem Azhar) > Absolutely correct: can I direct you to two of our articles on the subject > (and a useful graphic): > http://www.economist.com/issue/19-10-96/ld4401.html > http://www.economist.com/issue/19-10-96/sf0774.html > http://www.economist.com/issue/19-10-96/sf1.gif > I took a quick look at the articles, and see that you have confused rather a lot of technical details. For example, "intranets" are not "new" ways to bypass the Internet, and there is no such thing as a "private Internet". Intranets are just marketing-speak for the _existing_ local networks that the Internet joined together. Most local networks are already "private"; private networks have been with us for decades, and the "big I" Internet connects them to make them accessible outside their locality. Although you have identified some of the problems with currently priced phone systems, you were incorrect to state that the largest cost to the PSTN is the switches and wires. It is well documented here in the States that that the largest expense of any PSTN is the cost of administration, billing, and call management. It is clear that the primary edge enjoyed by the current Internet pricing models is the reduction in administrative overhead. It is inaccurate to say that "[Internet] users pay only for their cars and its fuel". The cost of the "street" is fixed, and well known to the providers, and is already included in the monthly cost of the "fuel". Similar to how we already fund roads here in the States (fuel tax)! And I wouldn't place too much credibility on the Varian/Mackie-Mason papers. As I have been watching them for some years, they published the same papers with minor modifications in multiple publications (a general no-no in the academic community for padding their Curriculum Vitae), and have had in the past models that bore little resemblance to Internet reality. As Mackie-Mason once admitted to me, (paraphrased off the top of my head) these concepts have been over-simplified for the consumption of economists. > That's true: in a conversation with Phil Lawlor (CEO of AGIS), he told me > that one of his customers ISPs, who was also peering with AGIS at the > Mae-E, indulged in "bandwidth stealing" by receiving their Usenet news feed > across Mae-E rather than as an AGIS customer across the few T-1s they had > to AGIS. > It seems you do not understand the concept of "peering", and little understand routing mechanisms. If the ISP is peering with AGIS at MAE-East, then AGIS has agreed to accept traffic _sent_ from the ISP at MAE-East for the rest of its network, at those locations included in AGIS BGP advertisements. Conversely, unless the AGIS routing sends to that ISP at MAE-East, then it would be impossible for the ISP to _receive_ their Usenet feed from AGIS. Therefore, AGIS itself _must_ have directed the flow at the ISP via MAE-East. The Internet routing is based on best-effort forwarding, not receiving. WSimpson(a)UMich.edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32 BSimpson(a)MorningStar.com Key fingerprint = 2E 07 23 03 C5 62 70 D3 59 B1 4F 5E 1D C2 C1 A2

1 0

Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations
by azeem＠dial.pipex.com 26 Oct '96

26 Oct '96

>I think the argument is undermined by the fact that peering in Europe is >in a fairly dismal state. Were there a MAE-{London, Paris, Prague} I >somehow think that the big five at least might throw a T3 or two over. >Until that happens, nothing will change. Maybe as access points start >springing up in Japan, the Phillipines, etc., the roadblocks to such a >cooperative project will start to be removed.' There are several large exchanges in Europe: the LINX (www.linx.net) with 28 peers, although some more peerworthy than others the D-GIX (at Stockholm) AMSIX E-bone in Paris and many others in Denmark, Rome, etc. And as for US providers throwing T3s they are starting to . . . but after UK (in particular) providers went the other way. Azeem Azeem Azhar vx: 0171-830 7133 The Economist fx: 0171-839 2968 25 St James's Street London SW1A 1HG

1 0

Inter-provider relations
by JDF 26 Oct '96

26 Oct '96

Interesting speech from Peter Kline at NANOG today...it seems that AGIS's peering requirements are now so strict that AGIS today would not peer with AGIS of only a few months ago. Then there's Peter's comment to Ron Burleson, Cheif Operating Officer of CAIS Internet (some of you know that CAIS had a very good relationship with Net99, which continued for a while under AGIS.) "Ron, we're going to squish you like a bug." Peter is doing wonders for inter-provider relations. What do y'all say that the rest of us follow the older, more friendly model, instead of trying to kill each other? Sure, a lot of us are in competition. From today's speech, it seems that AGIS is is more competition than the rest of us. But personally, if I were a small or mid-size provider, I'd rather buy service from somebody that I've seen to be in /friendly/ competition with their peers -- that way, once I got big enough to strike out on my own, I could stay friendly with my old provider on a peer instead of a customer level. This was the intention with the Net99 deal, back when Net99 was known as "the backbone that doesn't suck." Back to the point -- like it or not, we all rely on each other and each others' networks to make the Internet happen. We can follow the AGIS model and cut each others' throats until we really are just a bunch of autonomous systems with the occasional path between, or we can interconnect -- network, to use a more laoded term. I think we should be a network. (Please note that while I am speaking only for myself, CAIS's business plan is more on the friendly side.) -- J.D. Falk <lart(a)cais.net> Network Operations Center <noc(a)cais.net> CAIS Internet Office (703) 448-4470 McLean, Virginia, USA NOC 1-888-CAIS-NOC

9 12

Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations
by Barry Raveendran Greene 26 Oct '96

26 Oct '96

Jeremy Porter wrote: >The Economist's model is incomplete, however I really doubt >it could be argued that Europe subsidizes the US Internet. >A large reason the cost of international leased lines are so >high is due to projectionist tariffs in international Telecom. >I understand it is cheaper to buy a leased line from the >us to Europe than the other way around. OK. So take the US 1/2 circuit costs for both halves of a Atlantic circuit. A T1 would cost 5 - 6 time more across the Atlantic vs 10 times the cost if it was 1/2 US 1/2 Euro-Telco. If the circuit was across the Pacific, and you used the US price for both 1/2s then a T1 would be 7 - 8 time more than a T1 in the US. Yes, Jeremy. You cannot escape the fact that the rest of the world subsidizes US ISP who access the Internet around the world. The economics are skewed. A customer in a ISP in country X. would pay the realistic charges for International access. A customer in a ISP in the US pay domestic access for full international connectivity. That's reality. Barry -- Barry Raveendran Greene | || || | Senior Consulting Engineering | || || | Singapore | |||| |||| | tel: +65 738-5535 ext 235 | ..:||||||:..:||||||:.. | e-mail: bgreene(a)cisco.com | c i s c o S y s t e m s |

1 0

http://www.mids.org/weather/pingstats/
by John S. Quarterman 25 Oct '96

25 Oct '96

Some of you may find the subject URL of interest. It points to statistical summaries of a largish set of pings that we have been conducting regularly since December 1993. This is the data that persuaded Bob Metcalfe to change his prediction from complete demise of the Internet in 1996 to multiple small catastrophes. Your interpretation may vary. Geographical summaries of this data have been available for some time as the MIDS Internet Weather Report <URL:http://www.mids.org/weather>. Thanks, John John S. Quarterman <jsq(a)mids.org> Editor, Matrix Maps Quarterly and Matrix News <mids(a)mids.org> Matrix Information and Directory Services (MIDS) <URL:http://www.mids.org> +1-512-451-7602, fax: +1-512-452-0127 1106 Clayton Lane, Suite 500W Austin, TX 78723 U.S.A.

1 0

Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations
by Vadim Antonov 25 Oct '96

25 Oct '96

Jim Dixon <jdd(a)vbc.net> wrote: >Europe heavily subsidizes the US Internet. It's not just VBCnet: the >European Internet community pays something like 90% of the costs of >traffic between Europe and North America. The same applies to the >rest of the world. Most of all Europe heavily subsidizes its own government bureaucracies. In some places it's cheaper to drag a circuit to US and back than from one European country to another. There are numerous licensing problems. Then, you forgot direct U.S. subsidies (like ICM program sponsored by NSF). Without ICM, the access costs for European (and elsewhere) countries would be quite a lot higher. Finally, the situation will change when backbone carriers will truely internationalize by expanding backbones beyond U.S., and when large European companies will expand business to U.S. (some do -- like BT which gave MCI quite a chunk of money, which at least partially were used to build MCInet). Some my friends used to work for Cable & Wireless, which is moving into Internet business as well (in U.S.). --vadim

2 1

Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations
by Vadim Antonov 25 Oct '96

25 Oct '96

Jim Dixon <jdd(a)vbc.net> wrote: >I am not on some sort of crusade; this is not a stable arrangement and >won't last. Benefits flow both ways; in time the costs will come to >more or less match the benefits. Not because I say yes or you say no >but because the market will adjust itself. >I can see how the system currently works, and I know it's not going to last. Yes, i agree completely. Unfortunately i can't talk about what other people's plans regarging changes in economics of US-Europe connectivity. --vadim

1 0