From the sound of things, it seems that C&W might have been better off migrating AS3561 into AS3967, not the other way around ;)
I am assuming that the reasons it's not happening like this are much more political than technical. -C On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 10:18:04AM -0800, Bill Woodcock wrote:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote: > You mean Exodus are well connected and C&W limit themselves which gives > longer paths and increased latency.
Longer paths definitely, increased jitter probably, increased latency probably, increased loss possibly.
C&W obviously have to have a lot of peering as well, since it's all they have to sell to their customers. However, their peering tends to be limited to a small number of peers to whom they have large connections, whereas Exodus had a large number of peers to whom they had medium-sized connections. So the average hop-count and as-path length for the Internet as a whole are both increased by this action, and nearly all paths increase in length for Exodus customers. So yes, Exodus customers are the big losers in the wake of this.
-Bill