At 12:44 PM 9/17/97 -0700, Vadim Antonov wrote:
Kent W. England wrote:
At that point a pizza parlor owner says to himself "two out of every five of my customers are on the Internet. Perhaps I need a web page." And, suddenly, pizza on the Net makes a lot of sense and the traffic patterns shift. As the density grows to 90%, local traffic becomes dominant over distant traffic.
Georgaphically local, not topologically.
A *big* difference.
Unless we're willing to go back to regulated monopolies geographical locality makes little difference in overall traffic patterns.
--vadim
Not true, it is when geographical locality of traffic becomes significant (lets say 10 percent of the traffic originating in a city is destined for the same city, or even 5 percent, or maybe even 2 percent), that it makes sense to make a very very strong push into many more local exchanges. I see this eventuality as inevitable, and as such believe that encouraging local exchanges to be of prime importance to our ability to route traffic for our customers both inexpensively and quickly.
Justin W. Newton
I agree that geographical locality of traffic is important, but a majority of the local traffic won't be going through these exchanges until the big backbones compromise on their peering policies, and exchange "local pop" sets of routes in peering sessions. I think we can prevent people from pointing their default routes to these interfaces by enthusiastic application of spiked LARTs. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew W. Smith ** awsmith@neosoft.com ** Network Engineer ** 1-888-NEOSOFT ** "Opportunities multiply as they are seized" - Sun Tzu ** ** http://www.neosoft.com/neosoft/staff/andrew ** ---------------------------------------------------------------------------