Could someone from Comcast's NOC contact me off-list? We're seeing some traffic take a strange route on its way back to some Comcast prefixes from several of our systems. Thank you! -Rob
On 02/03/2013 18:07, Vinod K wrote:
I hear there are networks at capacity b/c of ratios. Everybody wants to send Comcast traffic, but noone wants to send money.
The flip side of this argument is that as it's mostly an access network with an asymmetric last mile infrastructure, the natural aggregate internet traffic profile of the total sum (bytes-in, bytes-out) counted at the customer hand-off points will tend to be weighted in one direction. For providers who have an overall asymmetric traffic profile towards Comcast, it's a matter of perspective as to whether you view this as the providers sending Comcast traffic or Comcast customers pulling it. So it's hardly surprising that there are disagreements about who gets to pay the other for the interconnection arrangements. Nick
And the sad surprising part of all this is that they don't do public peering, which would go long ways to reduce pressures on their network... Nor do the wish to sell transit to their network at a reasonable rate .. What a shame! Faisal On Mar 3, 2013, at 7:40 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
On Mar 3, 2013, at 7:40 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
Saying that it's a matter of perspective is a false dichotomy. If the providers go away, the Comcast customers will pull traffic from other providers. If the *customers* go away... Nope; Comcast is acting as the agent of its customers to pull in traffic they want to see, and if it isn't charging them enough for that, that is *Comcast's* problem. It's really a bright-line answer. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA #natog +1 727 647 1274
Comcast's customers send money to Comcast in order to receive whatever they want from other networks. With that money, Comcast should invest in infrastructure so that it's network is not saturated anymore. Isn't this how IPSs work ? :) On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Vinod K <vinod408@hotmail.com> wrote:
My comment was more or less directed to the person that said "losts of people want to send traffic to comcast, but no one wants to send money". I find it very dangerous and provocative, and somewhat on the same line with others that believe in the "sender party pays" crap they're trying to force onto the market. On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Jamie Bowden <jamie@photon.com> wrote:
Eugen and NANOG I'm sorry. My earlier comment was from conversation my last employer had about peering with Comcast where they told us they had balanced ratios. You can see from Ren Provo that is no longer true. This is politics as usual, playing the silly game. I am sorry to offend. I wish they work things out with Google so Youtube will stop buffering. Regards Vinod
Its a bit more complicated than that, especially when you're a large operator that all the content providers need to be able to reach and you have a (largely) converged backbone system. On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Eugeniu Patrascu <eugen@imacandi.net> wrote:
-- Scott Helms Vice President of Technology ZCorum (678) 507-5000 -------------------------------- http://twitter.com/kscotthelms --------------------------------
participants (10)
-
Eugeniu Patrascu
-
Faisal Imtiaz
-
Jamie Bowden
-
Jay Ashworth
-
Livingood, Jason
-
Nick Hilliard
-
R W
-
Ren Provo
-
Scott Helms
-
Vinod K