On Sat, 22 Aug 1998, Owen DeLong wrote:
Since flow studies are confidential information, I will not quote from them. However, I will say that I would think it intuitively obvious to almost anyone on this list that Web Hosters don't OFFER very many packets that aren't a response to a REQUEST.
I know nothing of packets being OFFERED or REQUESTED. I only know of two networks which are peering and exchanging traffic. Neither network OFFERS or REQUESTS data. They both perform an identical function of routing packets through an exchange point. I can measure those streams of bits and determine that one peer has more bits going out than coming in. This is clearly an asymmetry. The question is that if such asymmetries become more common and if the spreads between bits in and bits out increases, can we continue to consider these two networks to be peers in the same way we considered two networks to be peers in 1994. Or do we need to update our definition of what peering means and provide interconnect choices between pure peering and pure transit? The users and the web servers are largely irrelevant background noise in this discussion of peering relationships. Yes, we know that they exist and how they use the network. Yes, we know that if networks specialize in certain types of customers it will result in asymmetries at exchange points. That is the context, but I believe that we can factor out that context from the peering relationship itself and the reason that I believe we can and should factor out that context is that BOTH TYPES OF CUSTOMER PAY FOR SERVICE. Web browsing customers pay for service and web hosting customers pay for service. Their relationship to their network provider is a done deal. Once their packets enter the network they are merely packets full of bits that cross exchange points between peers. Forget the end points of the packet flows. Look at what is happening between the two network peers.
The shifting of the traffic flows is changing at roughly the same rate on BOTH sides, not because of one sides business model.
Yes. And I don't pretend to have all the answers here and I don't intend to imply that only one type of provider should pay the other type. Let's remember that any two peers are exchanging traffic at several points in the network. But the only situation in which a dialup provider and a webhosting provider will not have problematic asymmetry is when both providers have POPs in the same set of cities and both providers have private exchange points in every one of those cities. Then, although there would be asymmetry of traffic flows, if you go by my model where only inter-city transit has a value, there would be no value asymmetry in this situation.
Generally, the purchaser pays shipping in almost all commerce. This has been true for a very long time.
I hesitate to draw parallels between the movement of atoms and that of electrons. -- Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting Memra Communications Inc. - E-mail: michael@memra.com Check the website for my Internet World articles - http://www.memra.com