Looks like they settled their peering argument?: GTE Internetworking has joined with Exodus Communications, Inc. to speed up their customers' access to the Internet. [....] http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9809152gte -joe -- NewsHub: http://www.NewsHub.com/tech/ MultiTrace: http://www.MultiTrace.com/ DomainWatch: http://www.DomainWatch.com/
On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Joe McDonald wrote:
Looks like they settled their peering argument?:
GTE Internetworking has joined with Exodus Communications, Inc. to speed up their customers' access to the Internet. [....] http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9809152gte
Hmm.. not to start another massive thread here, but I wonder if this means that Exodus is now paying for transit and/or peering? Tim ---------------------------------------------------- Timothy M. Wolfe | Why surf when you can Sail? tim@clipper.net | Join Oregon's Premier Sr. Network Engineer | Wireless Internet Provider! ClipperNet Corporation | http://www.clipper.net/ ----------------------------------------------------
Or perhaps Exodus is evening out the byte miles between source and destination ISPs by hauling traffic closer to the destination before it leaves their network.
GTE Internetworking has joined with Exodus Communications, Inc. to speed up their customers' access to the Internet. Hmm.. not to start another massive thread here, but I wonder if this means that Exodus is now paying for transit and/or peering?
On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Jon Zeeff wrote:
Or perhaps Exodus is evening out the byte miles between source and destination ISPs by hauling traffic closer to the destination before it leaves their network.
Anyone care to take bets that they aren't using the pay by the bit proposals many people here were talking about? ;) ---------------------------------------------------- Timothy M. Wolfe | Why surf when you can Sail? tim@clipper.net | Join Oregon's Premier Sr. Network Engineer | Wireless Internet Provider! ClipperNet Corporation | http://www.clipper.net/ ----------------------------------------------------
Cold potato routing is great as long as you have sufficent bandwidth to do this. Anyone with that spare bw will be running one of the best ISPs i'm sure :) - jared On Tue, Sep 15, 1998 at 07:51:10PM -0400, Jon Zeeff wrote:
Or perhaps Exodus is evening out the byte miles between source and destination ISPs by hauling traffic closer to the destination before it leaves their network.
GTE Internetworking has joined with Exodus Communications, Inc. to speed up their customers' access to the Internet. Hmm.. not to start another massive thread here, but I wonder if this means that Exodus is now paying for transit and/or peering?
-- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/
Uhm.. We were doing that originally before the whole mess started :) On Tue, Sep 15, 1998 at 07:51:10PM -0400, Jon Zeeff wrote:
Or perhaps Exodus is evening out the byte miles between source and destination ISPs by hauling traffic closer to the destination before it leaves their network.
-- Steven O. Noble -- Sr. Backbone Engineer, Exodus Communications (EXDS) -- Work:408.346.2333 -- All my love to the Canadian Mooing Frog.
With only two egress points you generally can't get all that close to the destination. Adding more points would mean less byte miles for BBN.
Uhm.. We were doing that originally before the whole mess started :)
Or perhaps Exodus is evening out the byte miles between source and destination ISPs by hauling traffic closer to the destination before it leaves their network.
Of course its not much different then being at most of the public exchange points, with the majority being on the east and west coasts. The goal in my mine in doing private peering is to get the traffic to and from the consumer at a faster and less lossy rate. By expanding the amount of peering places you can better achieve this. On Tue, Sep 15, 1998 at 10:38:31PM -0400, Jon Zeeff wrote:
With only two egress points you generally can't get all that close to the destination. Adding more points would mean less byte miles for BBN.
-- Steven O. Noble -- Sr. Backbone Engineer, Exodus Communications (EXDS) -- Work:408.346.2333 -- All my love to the Canadian Mooing Frog.
On Tue, Sep 15, 1998 at 04:24:25PM -0700, Tim Wolfe wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Joe McDonald wrote:
Looks like they settled their peering argument?:
GTE Internetworking has joined with Exodus Communications, Inc. to speed up their customers' access to the Internet. [....] http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9809152gte
Hmm.. not to start another massive thread here, but I wonder if this means that Exodus is now paying for transit and/or peering?
Disclosure of this information is probally violation of the agreement, so unless you work for one of them, or know someone who does, you won't find out. The ability to speculate is great though :) - jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/
Hmm.. not to start another massive thread here, but I wonder if this means that Exodus is now paying for transit and/or peering?
Disclosure of this information is probally violation of the agreement, so unless you work for one of them, or know someone who does, you won't find out.
Indeed. Point well taken. Still, I have a funny feeling that GTEI/BBN is being compensated royally for this. This would have never happened otherwise, methinks. I doubt Mr. Curran is doing this simply to allow himself and his customers to continue accesssing quality Exodus-hosted content, such as the Spice Girls and whitehouse.com. Then again, I could be mistaken! :-)
last i checked www.spicegirls.com wasn't on the exodus network. i think it's on netkonect.net whitehouse.com is on exodus though... ;) as per the contractual issues, all they told lowly engineers like myself was that we could disclose publicly the fact: 1. we have reached a solution with GTEi 2. it includes expanding ds3's with them 3. we're not buying transit or paying for peering 4. we're like friends and stuff now... ;) i'm sure when bowman gets up, he'll have something to say. he probably has a LOT more insight into #3 -dhiraj sr. systems engineer, exodus communications On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Adam Rothschild wrote:
Hmm.. not to start another massive thread here, but I wonder if this means that Exodus is now paying for transit and/or peering?
Disclosure of this information is probally violation of the agreement, so unless you work for one of them, or know someone who does, you won't find out.
Indeed. Point well taken.
Still, I have a funny feeling that GTEI/BBN is being compensated royally for this. This would have never happened otherwise, methinks.
I doubt Mr. Curran is doing this simply to allow himself and his customers to continue accesssing quality Exodus-hosted content, such as the Spice Girls and whitehouse.com. Then again, I could be mistaken! :-)
On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, dhiraj murthy wrote:
last i checked www.spicegirls.com wasn't on the exodus network.
i think it's on netkonect.net
Well, last time I was at your Joisey colo, I saw a Sun Ultra labeled "spice girls" somewhere. I never bothered to investigate further; my bad.
whitehouse.com is on exodus though... ;)
Indeed!
as per the contractual issues, all they told lowly engineers like myself was that we could disclose publicly the fact:
1. we have reached a solution with GTEi 2. it includes expanding ds3's with them 3. we're not buying transit or paying for peering
Question is: How does money pass hands? Do you pay any "facilities" costs to GTEI/BBN, that technically may not be considered "paying for peering", for isntance?
4. we're like friends and stuff now... ;)
i'm sure when bowman gets up, he'll have something to say. he probably has a LOT more insight into #3
Insight is good.
At 10:41 AM 09/16/1998 -0400, dhiraj murthy wrote:
1. we have reached a solution with GTEi 2. it includes expanding ds3's with them 3. we're not buying transit or paying for peering 4. we're like friends and stuff now... ;)
Hmm... this isn't the complete story, but Exodus needs to decide whether it wants complete information released.
i'm sure when bowman gets up, he'll have something to say. he probably has a LOT more insight into #3
If you're going to post some information about the agreement, get the information from Ellen Hancock, BV Jagadeesh, or Bert Dollahite. Rob wasn't in the negotiations; I don't know the extent to which he has been briefed. I can't post information about the agreement because of Exodus's request to keep such confidential. If this changes, please let me know. Thanks! /John
Nope... we're not paying for transit or peering. In fact, we don't buy any transit (or at least none that i know of ;) ... steve or rob can probably elaborate a bit more on this.) Our peering strategy is more a group effort. (See http://agora.com/fronts/blueprint.html ... describes the Brokered Private Peering Group we started with ELI, Savvis and others...) Hope that clarifies stuph. -Dhiraj Sr. Systems Engineer Exodus Communications On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Tim Wolfe wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Joe McDonald wrote:
Looks like they settled their peering argument?:
GTE Internetworking has joined with Exodus Communications, Inc. to speed up their customers' access to the Internet. [....] http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9809152gte
Hmm.. not to start another massive thread here, but I wonder if this means that Exodus is now paying for transit and/or peering?
Tim
---------------------------------------------------- Timothy M. Wolfe | Why surf when you can Sail? tim@clipper.net | Join Oregon's Premier Sr. Network Engineer | Wireless Internet Provider! ClipperNet Corporation | http://www.clipper.net/ ----------------------------------------------------
participants (9)
-
Adam Rothschild -
Austin Schutz -
dhiraj murthy -
Jared Mauch -
joe＠vpop.net -
John Curran -
jzeeff＠verio.net -
steve＠altrina.exodus.net -
Tim Wolfe