dan@netrail.net ("Daniel L. Golding") writes:
I would suspect Savvis, perhaps, or Epoch? Curt is certainly not involved with NetRail in any way.
I just liked the description, "small tier-1". (I guess if you have a PC and a modem, you're tier-1 now?)
vixie@mfnx.net said:
I just liked the description, "small tier-1". (I guess if you have a PC and a modem, you're tier-1 now?)
If you refuse to peer with anyone at all, you can be tier-0. This can be achieved with considerable savings to phone line utilization. -- Alex Bligh Senior Technology Officer, Europe XO Communications - http://www.xo.com/ (formerly Nextlink Inc, Concentric Network Corporation GX Networks, Xara Networks)
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 07:51:30PM +0000, Alex Bligh wrote:
If you refuse to peer with anyone at all, you can be tier-0. This can be achieved with considerable savings to phone line utilization.
Actually, we already have a tier-0. See: http://www.opnix.net/perl/PressRelease.cgi?article=100032 (And many other things on their website.) Particularly amusing is: http://www.opnix.net/whatwedo/performance.shtml --msa
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
Particularly amusing is:
If you have any questions about our route intelligence technologies (the above link talks about that a bit) or how it relates-to / interoperates-with BGP4, please feel free to ask me. I'd be happy to answer any questions. :)
--msa
-- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
Particularly amusing is:
If you have any questions about our route intelligence technologies (the above link talks about that a bit) or how it relates-to / interoperates-with BGP4, please feel free to ask me. I'd be happy to answer any questions. :)
Sounds like InterNAP copy and I didn't believe them either. Neil.
Im particularily intrigued by the Opnix customer care practices. A late-nite call to the Opnix NOClet on duty to find out why a certain netblock was unable to connect to the Opnix webserver(s) received the response "Are you a customer? I dont recognize your voice..." How does this scale beyond 10 customers? On a semi-technical front, what are you using to monitor RTT and how do you switch to new paths when you see that a current path is congested/latent/etc? How do you adapt to changes without thrashing, and how do you handle multi-homed customers, particularily those that are multihomed to multiple Opnix PNAPS^H^H^H^(oops, wrong marketing hype engine enabled)POPS? -troy On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
Particularly amusing is:
If you have any questions about our route intelligence technologies (the above link talks about that a bit) or how it relates-to / interoperates-with BGP4, please feel free to ask me. I'd be happy to answer any questions. :)
--msa
-- ~Jay
.. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Troy Corbin wrote:
late-nite call to the Opnix NOClet on duty to find out why a certain netblock was unable to connect to the Opnix webserver(s) received the response "Are you a customer? I dont recognize your voice..." How does
I've never heard of that one. Likewise, that's a crappy response. I'll forward this to our NOC Manager and CTO. Nobody's perfect, but the reply you got is totally unacceptable. I can assure you we don't handle calls based on voice recognition. :)
On a semi-technical front, what are you using to monitor RTT and how do
All of our tools/systems/protocols/etc... are proprietary, but just from the RTT perspective, traceroute or ping can give you a very basic RTT measurement. Speaking of tools, we're releasing an open source utility called "OpRoute" at the end of this month. The tool works something like traceroute, but it also reports # of NAPs, AS hops, layer 3 hops, latency, packet loss, etc... It also gives you the option to show a side-by-side compariason of those statistics (from "a" to "z") on your network versus another outside network. Anyway, this is coming out (with source code) at the end of the month -- if interested, I'll post a notice to this list when its released.
you switch to new paths when you see that a current path is congested/latent/etc? How do you adapt to changes without thrashing, and how do you handle multi-homed customers, particularily those that are
"Thrashing" routes is a concern. We have to throttle-back our optimizations and have put in some algorithms for dealing with this. The actual process of changing the route we do with proprietary protocols in-house. As for multihomed customers, that gets me into a whole new area... I don't know if this list would care to hear the entire bit, so I'll just hit the basics. If anyone wants more information, just email me off-list. Anyway, our current product (bandwidth) is being augmented by a new product (called IRIS) that goes into beta in April. IRIS is basically a client-side version of the routing intelligence technologies which interoperates with our core. IRIS is specifically for diverse networks (multihomed or otherwise) -- no matter if they're using the Opnix bandwidth product or not.
multihomed to multiple Opnix PNAPS^H^H^H^(oops, wrong marketing hype engine enabled)POPS?
Heh, you can never keep the marketing department under control. :) ~Jay
-troy
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
Particularly amusing is:
If you have any questions about our route intelligence technologies (the above link talks about that a bit) or how it relates-to / interoperates-with BGP4, please feel free to ask me. I'd be happy to answer any questions. :)
--msa
-- ~Jay
.. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
-- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
Hmmm. How do you figure out when you have crossed a NAP? Hard-coded table of exchange point IP blocks? That will work for the larger NAPs, but wouldn't necesarily detect passing over a peering switch in a PAIX or Equinix facility (unless they are all in your table...) Munging reverse DNS? :) Of course, treating all NAPs the same is tricky business. FDDI, ATM, Gig Ethernet, etc, are far different animals. Most of the conventional wisdom surrounding public peering came to light during the heyday of the FDDI NAPs. Daniel Golding NetRail,Inc. "Better to light a candle than to curse the darkness" On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Troy Corbin wrote:
late-nite call to the Opnix NOClet on duty to find out why a certain netblock was unable to connect to the Opnix webserver(s) received the response "Are you a customer? I dont recognize your voice..." How does
I've never heard of that one. Likewise, that's a crappy response. I'll forward this to our NOC Manager and CTO. Nobody's perfect, but the reply you got is totally unacceptable. I can assure you we don't handle calls based on voice recognition. :)
On a semi-technical front, what are you using to monitor RTT and how do
All of our tools/systems/protocols/etc... are proprietary, but just from the RTT perspective, traceroute or ping can give you a very basic RTT measurement.
Speaking of tools, we're releasing an open source utility called "OpRoute" at the end of this month. The tool works something like traceroute, but it also reports # of NAPs, AS hops, layer 3 hops, latency, packet loss, etc... It also gives you the option to show a side-by-side compariason of those statistics (from "a" to "z") on your network versus another outside network.
Anyway, this is coming out (with source code) at the end of the month -- if interested, I'll post a notice to this list when its released.
you switch to new paths when you see that a current path is congested/latent/etc? How do you adapt to changes without thrashing, and how do you handle multi-homed customers, particularily those that are
"Thrashing" routes is a concern. We have to throttle-back our optimizations and have put in some algorithms for dealing with this. The actual process of changing the route we do with proprietary protocols in-house.
As for multihomed customers, that gets me into a whole new area... I don't know if this list would care to hear the entire bit, so I'll just hit the basics. If anyone wants more information, just email me off-list. Anyway, our current product (bandwidth) is being augmented by a new product (called IRIS) that goes into beta in April. IRIS is basically a client-side version of the routing intelligence technologies which interoperates with our core. IRIS is specifically for diverse networks (multihomed or otherwise) -- no matter if they're using the Opnix bandwidth product or not.
multihomed to multiple Opnix PNAPS^H^H^H^(oops, wrong marketing hype engine enabled)POPS?
Heh, you can never keep the marketing department under control. :)
~Jay
-troy
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
Particularly amusing is:
If you have any questions about our route intelligence technologies (the above link talks about that a bit) or how it relates-to / interoperates-with BGP4, please feel free to ask me. I'd be happy to answer any questions. :)
--msa
-- ~Jay
.. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
-- ~Jay
.. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
I believe the "NAP Detection" algorithms are proprietary (I'll have to check with our VP of Software Devel to be sure). I do know for sure, however, that we do not just use a static table. Regardless of the architecture of a NAP (or any of the connections therein), the act of traffic simply going through a NAP does not always mean that's a bad route. Many (most) of the NAPs are overloaded, sure, but what really matters is latency, packet loss, etc... If a NAP route has the highest performance (hey, it's possible :) then it's a good route. Many times this may not be the case, but it's possible. ~Jay On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Daniel L. Golding wrote:
Hmmm.
How do you figure out when you have crossed a NAP? Hard-coded table of exchange point IP blocks? That will work for the larger NAPs, but wouldn't necesarily detect passing over a peering switch in a PAIX or Equinix facility (unless they are all in your table...) Munging reverse DNS? :)
Of course, treating all NAPs the same is tricky business. FDDI, ATM, Gig Ethernet, etc, are far different animals. Most of the conventional wisdom surrounding public peering came to light during the heyday of the FDDI NAPs.
Daniel Golding NetRail,Inc. "Better to light a candle than to curse the darkness"
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Troy Corbin wrote:
late-nite call to the Opnix NOClet on duty to find out why a certain netblock was unable to connect to the Opnix webserver(s) received the response "Are you a customer? I dont recognize your voice..." How does
I've never heard of that one. Likewise, that's a crappy response. I'll forward this to our NOC Manager and CTO. Nobody's perfect, but the reply you got is totally unacceptable. I can assure you we don't handle calls based on voice recognition. :)
On a semi-technical front, what are you using to monitor RTT and how do
All of our tools/systems/protocols/etc... are proprietary, but just from the RTT perspective, traceroute or ping can give you a very basic RTT measurement.
Speaking of tools, we're releasing an open source utility called "OpRoute" at the end of this month. The tool works something like traceroute, but it also reports # of NAPs, AS hops, layer 3 hops, latency, packet loss, etc... It also gives you the option to show a side-by-side compariason of those statistics (from "a" to "z") on your network versus another outside network.
Anyway, this is coming out (with source code) at the end of the month -- if interested, I'll post a notice to this list when its released.
you switch to new paths when you see that a current path is congested/latent/etc? How do you adapt to changes without thrashing, and how do you handle multi-homed customers, particularily those that are
"Thrashing" routes is a concern. We have to throttle-back our optimizations and have put in some algorithms for dealing with this. The actual process of changing the route we do with proprietary protocols in-house.
As for multihomed customers, that gets me into a whole new area... I don't know if this list would care to hear the entire bit, so I'll just hit the basics. If anyone wants more information, just email me off-list. Anyway, our current product (bandwidth) is being augmented by a new product (called IRIS) that goes into beta in April. IRIS is basically a client-side version of the routing intelligence technologies which interoperates with our core. IRIS is specifically for diverse networks (multihomed or otherwise) -- no matter if they're using the Opnix bandwidth product or not.
multihomed to multiple Opnix PNAPS^H^H^H^(oops, wrong marketing hype engine enabled)POPS?
Heh, you can never keep the marketing department under control. :)
~Jay
-troy
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
Particularly amusing is:
If you have any questions about our route intelligence technologies (the above link talks about that a bit) or how it relates-to / interoperates-with BGP4, please feel free to ask me. I'd be happy to answer any questions. :)
--msa
-- ~Jay
.. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
-- ~Jay
.. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
-- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
yOn Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
Speaking of tools, we're releasing an open source utility called "OpRoute" at the end of this month. The tool works something like traceroute, but it also reports # of NAPs, AS hops, layer 3 hops, latency, packet loss, etc... It also gives you the option to show a side-by-side compariason of those statistics (from "a" to "z") on your network versus another outside network.
And just how do you know when someone went through a NAP?
Anyway, this is coming out (with source code) at the end of the month -- if interested, I'll post a notice to this list when its released.
Very interested. I _REALLY_ get off on screwing with marketing hype motivated people.
"Thrashing" routes is a concern. We have to throttle-back our optimizations and have put in some algorithms for dealing with this. The actual process of changing the route we do with proprietary protocols in-house.
Read: Modify route-map xxx "clear ip bgp x.x.x.x soft in"
As for multihomed customers, that gets me into a whole new area... I don't know if this list would care to hear the entire bit, so I'll just hit the basics. If anyone wants more information, just email me off-list. Anyway, our current product (bandwidth) is being augmented by a new product (called IRIS) that goes into beta in April. IRIS is basically a client-side version of the routing intelligence technologies which interoperates with our core. IRIS is specifically for diverse networks (multihomed or otherwise) -- no matter if they're using the Opnix bandwidth product or not.
Let me guess. IRIS doesn't run on the 75xx or 120xx? Rules of thumb in internet marketing to geeks: (1) Make it work with Cisco (2) Make it ACT like Cisco
multihomed to multiple Opnix PNAPS^H^H^H^(oops, wrong marketing hype engine enabled)POPS?
Heh, you can never keep the marketing department under control. :)
~Jay
It's real easy when you have ENGINEER types holding the purse. You don't let the Marketing Types release BULLSHIT to the word. If/When they do, you fire their dumb %$$es. It's that simple. They have released something that is going to be an EMBARRASSMENT to the company in front of anyone who is technically compitent. They have alienated 90% of your customer base. They are FIRED. --- John "Never fired a Marketing Type I didn't already hate" Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, John Fraizer wrote:
And just how do you know when someone went through a NAP?
...read the code when OpRoute is released at the end of this month.
Very interested. I _REALLY_ get off on screwing with marketing hype motivated people.
It would seem you _REALLY_ get off on screwing with anyone that does not think the same way you do. If you would like to carry-on a flame war with me, why don't we take it off list.
Let me guess. IRIS doesn't run on the 75xx or 120xx?
No, it doesn't. It does, however, fully integrate with BGP4-enabled routers -- Cisco, Juniper, Lucent, Nortel, Foundry, Riverstone, etc...
Rules of thumb in internet marketing to geeks:
(1) Make it work with Cisco (2) Make it ACT like Cisco
Thanks for the pointers; already covered though. IRIS does work just fine with Cisco gear and, just like most other network gear CLIs, the IRIS CLI should act similar to IOS.
It's real easy when you have ENGINEER types holding the purse. You don't
Four of the five founders of Opnix (including myself) are "engineer types."
let the Marketing Types release BULLSHIT to the word. If/When they do, you fire their dumb %$$es. It's that simple. They have released
It seems someone with a marketing degree must have pissed in your Cheerio's or something. Like any other group of people, there are both good and bad within the group. Like I said, engineering and marketing usually don't mix well. We all know that. We get plenty of opportunities to flame marketing and sales people for SPAM on lists -- we probably don't need to put any more effort into it. :) Again, if you want to have a flame-war, let's take it off-list. ~Jay
--- John "Never fired a Marketing Type I didn't already hate" Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
-- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
It would seem you _REALLY_ get off on screwing with anyone that does not think the same way you do. If you would like to carry-on a flame war with me, why don't we take it off list.
Not worth the time. You're not a marketing type. Just an engineer/investor who got screwed by giving marketing too much latitude.
Let me guess. IRIS doesn't run on the 75xx or 120xx?
No, it doesn't. It does, however, fully integrate with BGP4-enabled routers -- Cisco, Juniper, Lucent, Nortel, Foundry, Riverstone, etc...
So, nothing new eh?
It's real easy when you have ENGINEER types holding the purse. You don't
Four of the five founders of Opnix (including myself) are "engineer types."
You obviously didn't have your marketing monkeys pass your marketing hype through the "reality filter." Had you done so, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
let the Marketing Types release BULLSHIT to the word. If/When they do, you fire their dumb %$$es. It's that simple. They have released
It seems someone with a marketing degree must have pissed in your Cheerio's or something. Like any other group of people, there are both good and bad within the group. Like I said, engineering and marketing usually don't mix well. We all know that. We get plenty of opportunities to flame marketing and sales people for SPAM on lists -- we probably don't need to put any more effort into it. :)
Again, if you want to have a flame-war, let's take it off-list.
~Jay
Jay, It is very amusing that you take this personally and wish to take things off-list. IMHO, if your product is truely as revolutionary to networking as your marketing monkeys would have the "know nots" believe, any discussion of it will be truely on-topic for NANOG and in will in-fact become a MUST-READ for anyone who wishes to survive in the new networking world that your company has created. If you have nothing more than marketing hype to give us, shut up. This is an informational list. We don't give a rats behind about pipe-dreams and "we wish it were a standard" protocols. We run _REAL_ networks. Nets run on "proprietary" protocols are _BY_DEFINITION_ islands and as such, NOT part of the global internet. Trademark, copyright, have your dog leave his scent on the source/roadmap of your "proprietary protocol" but until you release it to the GP so we can critique it, you're nothing more than a rainmaker to me. --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
Fair enough. I refuse to get into personal disputes on-list. However, your points in this recent thread are well-taken. I need to get some sleep now (have to be up in ~3 hours), but I'll certainly reply to this post tomorrow. :) ~Jay On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, John Fraizer wrote:
Jay, It is very amusing that you take this personally and wish to take things off-list. IMHO, if your product is truely as revolutionary to networking as your marketing monkeys would have the "know nots" believe, any discussion of it will be truely on-topic for NANOG and in will in-fact become a MUST-READ for anyone who wishes to survive in the new networking world that your company has created.
If you have nothing more than marketing hype to give us, shut up. This is an informational list. We don't give a rats behind about pipe-dreams and "we wish it were a standard" protocols. We run _REAL_ networks. Nets run on "proprietary" protocols are _BY_DEFINITION_ islands and as such, NOT part of the global internet.
Trademark, copyright, have your dog leave his scent on the source/roadmap of your "proprietary protocol" but until you release it to the GP so we can critique it, you're nothing more than a rainmaker to me.
--- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
-- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
4 atm8-0-093.CR-2.uschcg.savvis.net (64.241.88.65) [AS 6347] 16 msec 12 msec 16 msec 5 at-0-2-0902.uslsan2-j20c.savvis.net (64.242.22.134) [AS 6347] 56 msec 60 msec 56 msec 6 opnix-1.usphnx.savvis.net (64.241.66.130) [AS 6347] 76 msec 80 msec 76 msec 7 bi01-ve2.phx.opnix.net (216.183.192.3) [AS 18591] 76 msec 76 msec 76 msec 8 www.opnix.net (216.183.194.131) [AS 18591] 80 msec 76 msec 76 msec I'd be really torqued off if I were you. It would appear that you're a direct customer of SAVVIS and that 76 ms RTT time to your network from another SAVVIS peer is outside of tha SAVVIS SOA. Not that it's any better from an accepted Tier_1: 10 opnix-dw.customer.alter.net (157.130.245.2) [AS 701] 76 msec 76 msec 76 msec 11 bi01-ve2.phx.opnix.net (216.183.192.3) [AS 18591] 76 msec 72 msec 72 msec 12 www.opnix.net (216.183.194.131) [AS 18591] 72 msec 76 msec 76 msec Globalcenter, UUNET, Level 3, C&W, and SAVVIS? That's all you've got? I'll put my connection at home up against that! I'm guessing that your "Best Path Global Transit (tm)" was on the fritz.... Right? Opnix, Inc. (ASN-OPNIX) 2220 W. 14th St. Tempe, AZ 85281 US Autonomous System Name: OPNIX Autonomous System Number: 18591 Coordinator: Kloain, John (JK928-ARIN) john@opnix.com 480-966-7551 Record last updated on 15-Sep-2000. Database last updated on 19-Feb-2001 18:27:46 EDT. Whoa.... High number ASN. MUST be a revolutionary, --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
John Fraizer wrote:
4 atm8-0-093.CR-2.uschcg.savvis.net (64.241.88.65) [AS 6347] 16 msec 12 msec 16 msec 5 at-0-2-0902.uslsan2-j20c.savvis.net (64.242.22.134) [AS 6347] 56 msec 60 msec 56 msec 6 opnix-1.usphnx.savvis.net (64.241.66.130) [AS 6347] 76 msec 80 msec 76 msec 7 bi01-ve2.phx.opnix.net (216.183.192.3) [AS 18591] 76 msec 76 msec 76 msec 8 www.opnix.net (216.183.194.131) [AS 18591] 80 msec 76 msec 76 msec
I'd be really torqued off if I were you. It would appear that you're a direct customer of SAVVIS and that 76 ms RTT time to your network from another SAVVIS peer is outside of tha SAVVIS SOA.
Not that it's any better from an accepted Tier_1:
10 opnix-dw.customer.alter.net (157.130.245.2) [AS 701] 76 msec 76 msec 76 msec 11 bi01-ve2.phx.opnix.net (216.183.192.3) [AS 18591] 76 msec 72 msec 72 msec 12 www.opnix.net (216.183.194.131) [AS 18591] 72 msec 76 msec 76 msec
Globalcenter, UUNET, Level 3, C&W, and SAVVIS? That's all you've got?
*cough* I used to get better results from my 128K ISDN line. 40-60 msec on average. -- Steve Sobol, BOFH, President 888.480.4NET 866.DSL.EXPRESS 216.619.2NET North Shore Technologies Corporation http://NorthShoreTechnologies.net JustTheNet/JustTheNet EXPRESS DSL (ISP Services) http://JustThe.net mailto:sjsobol@NorthShoreTechnologies.net Proud resident of Cleveland, Ohio
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
If you have any questions about our route intelligence technologies (the above link talks about that a bit) or how it relates-to / interoperates-with BGP4, please feel free to ask me. I'd be happy to answer any questions. :)
-- ~Jay
.. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
Yes Jay. I am interested in your technology. Beyond the fact that it appears to be 100% marketing hype BS, can you elaborate, _WITHOUT NDA_ about the following: (1) How does your "Best Path Global Transit (tm)" interact with the GLOBAL STANDARD BGP4 with respect to: (a) Influencing INBOUND data (b) Influencing INBOUND data (c) Influencing INBOUND data (d) Influencing INBOUND data (e) Influencing INBOUND data (f) Influencing INBOUND data (g) Influencing INBOUND data (h) Influencing INBOUND data (i) Influencing INBOUND data (j) Influencing INBOUND data (k) Influencing INBOUND data (l) Influencing INBOUND data (m) Influencing INBOUND data (n) Influencing INBOUND data (o) Influencing INBOUND data (p) Influencing INBOUND data (q) Influencing INBOUND data (r) Influencing INBOUND data (s) Influencing INBOUND data (t) Influencing INBOUND data (u) Influencing INBOUND data (v) Influencing INBOUND data (w) Influencing INBOUND data (x) Influencing INBOUND data (y) Influencing INBOUND data (z) Influencing INBOUND data (2)Is your "Best Path Global Transit (tm)" going to be released to public domain or are you going to become a "Tier-0" Island. (3) Have you thought about how much the rest of the world is going to laugh at "Tier-0?" ROTFLMAO --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, John Fraizer wrote:
Yes Jay. I am interested in your technology. Beyond the fact that it appears to be 100% marketing hype BS, can you elaborate, _WITHOUT NDA_ about the following:
A corporate web site, most often, is meant to be a marketing tool. We all know that marketing and engineering doesn't always mix well. Rather than dwelling on the flame-bait, I'll just address your questions as best I can. Some of the information is proprietary, and will not be disclosed with, or without, an NDA.
(1) How does your "Best Path Global Transit (tm)" interact with the GLOBAL STANDARD BGP4 with respect to:
(a) Influencing INBOUND data [snip] (z) Influencing INBOUND data
We influence (NOT control) inbound data a number of ways (some proprietary, some not). One of which is that we purchase all of our transit from the major carriers. With this relationship, we can get them to "do the right thing" on their end(s).
(2)Is your "Best Path Global Transit (tm)" going to be released to public
At this time, Best Path Global Transit will continue to be held as a proprietary technology. It does fully interoperate with BGP, but will remain proprietary for now.
(3) Have you thought about how much the rest of the world is going to laugh at "Tier-0?"
I have already addressed this point in a later reply on this thread, but I'll say it again... I don't agree with the "Tier-n" stuff, regardless of what the "n" is. Our web site is currently in the process of a re-do, and I'm certain that terminology will not be in the new version. Sometimes trying to contain marketing == herding cats. :) ~Jay
--- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
-- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, John Fraizer wrote:
Yes Jay. I am interested in your technology. Beyond the fact that it appears to be 100% marketing hype BS, can you elaborate, _WITHOUT NDA_ about the following:
A corporate web site, most often, is meant to be a marketing tool. We all know that marketing and engineering doesn't always mix well. Rather than dwelling on the flame-bait, I'll just address your questions as best I can. Some of the information is proprietary, and will not be disclosed with, or without, an NDA.
Sweet. Read: "Our marketing department came up with this. Engineering is still trying to figure out what the ^&*K they are talking about. As a result, we are not at liberty to discuss it, period, the end."
(1) How does your "Best Path Global Transit (tm)" interact with the GLOBAL STANDARD BGP4 with respect to:
(a) Influencing INBOUND data [snip] (z) Influencing INBOUND data
We influence (NOT control) inbound data a number of ways (some proprietary, some not). One of which is that we purchase all of our transit from the major carriers. With this relationship, we can get them to "do the right thing" on their end(s).
So, what you're saying is that you have come up with a _better_ SAVVIS/INTERNAP model. OK. Why don't you just have your marketing monkeys say that?
(2)Is your "Best Path Global Transit (tm)" going to be released to public
At this time, Best Path Global Transit will continue to be held as a proprietary technology. It does fully interoperate with BGP, but will remain proprietary for now.
I know. I know. It's hard to release a "vapor" protocol. You need Microsoft Marketing to do that.
(3) Have you thought about how much the rest of the world is going to laugh at "Tier-0?"
I have already addressed this point in a later reply on this thread, but I'll say it again... I don't agree with the "Tier-n" stuff, regardless of what the "n" is. Our web site is currently in the process of a re-do, and I'm certain that terminology will not be in the new version. Sometimes trying to contain marketing == herding cats. :)
~Jay
I'll give you credit for this much. You have someone subscribed to NANOG and someone up when the rest of us who REALLY run networks have the time to have an email conversation. _AND_ You have made me laugh after a REALLY long and stressful day. --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
We influence (NOT control) inbound data a number of ways (some proprietary, some not). One of which is that we purchase all of our transit from the major carriers. With this relationship, we can get them to "do the right thing" on their end(s).
So, what you're saying is that you have come up with a _better_ SAVVIS/INTERNAP model. OK. Why don't you just have your marketing monkeys say that?
How can you make having localprefs with 2903392 prepends better? :)
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001, John Fraizer wrote: [snip]
(3) Have you thought about how much the rest of the world is going to laugh at "Tier-0?"
I could spend days pointing out some "new" companies and their rather funny marketing stuff. Personally, I think some of the marketing "brandings" which are out there now border on possible false advertising / false representation, but I digress.. Adrian -- Adrian Chadd "Romance novel?" <adrian@creative.net.au> "Girl Porn." - http://www.sinfest.net/d/20010202.html
InterNAP has done the tier-0 marketing dance for some time. Quite successfully, as a matter of fact. Secret Sauce sells like hotcakes. Wall Street likes it as well. Not much of a performance increase, though. - Daniel Golding
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Majdi S. Abbas Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 3:09 PM To: Alex Bligh Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Network for Sale
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 07:51:30PM +0000, Alex Bligh wrote:
If you refuse to peer with anyone at all, you can be tier-0. This can be achieved with considerable savings to phone line utilization.
Actually, we already have a tier-0. See:
http://www.opnix.net/perl/PressRelease.cgi?article=100032
(And many other things on their website.)
Particularly amusing is:
http://www.opnix.net/whatwedo/performance.shtml
--msa
InterNAP has done the tier-0 marketing dance
So if I buy transit from players like Internap / Opnix & implement a similar system, am I tier-1, tier--1, or the victim of meaningless marketing hype? I'm sure both companies have fabulous and wonderful technologies, however in today's world of democratized terminology, seems to me anyone can be any tier they want to be (man). 'Tier 1' is now about as useful as the those restaurant menu descriptions which helpfully describe the dish in question with an equally otiose 'delicious'. -- Alex Bligh Senior Technology Officer, Europe XO Communications - http://www.xo.com/ (formerly Nextlink Inc, Concentric Network Corporation GX Networks, Xara Networks)
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Alex Bligh wrote:
So if I buy transit from players like Internap / Opnix & implement a similar system, am I tier-1, tier--1, or the victim of meaningless marketing hype?
The "Tier-n" argument is never-ending. I think the bottom-line is that (no offense) marketing people like it, engineers hate it. :) When discussing Opnix, I won't use the "Tier-0" stuff. I prefer to just stick with discussing our Internet/route intelligence technologies -- not basic network architecture. In the end, given all the "Tier-n" hype (good word, BTW), its probably best to just ignore any sentence with the word "tier" in it and read the rest. :) -- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Alex Bligh wrote:
InterNAP has done the tier-0 marketing dance
So if I buy transit from players like Internap / Opnix & implement a similar system, am I tier-1, tier--1, or the victim of meaningless marketing hype?
Yes. -- I'm being told I have lost the respect of some of my acquaintances in the anti-spam camp. That's a shame, as these are people I respect, people whose friendship I have enjoyed, in some cases for several years. However, it's not going to change my mind, and I resent the implication by some people that I'm not doing enough to fight spam. Thank you.
So if I buy transit from players like Internap / Opnix & implement a similar system, am I tier-1, tier--1, or the victim of meaningless marketing hype?
You should really be looking for a sun-dried Tier-0 that offers fire-roasted packet delivery. I hear those things are really hot right now. Mike
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
Particularly amusing is:
http://www.opnix.net/whatwedo/performance.shtml
--msa
From that web page:
"BGP4 makes static routing decisions" The last time I checked, BGP4 didn't do _ANTHING_ static. Perhaps the kind folks at OPNIX would like to tell us something we don't know about BGP. After all, they did manage to create a new tier. --- John "Kill the marketing people" Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, John Fraizer wrote:
The last time I checked, BGP4 didn't do _ANTHING_ static. Perhaps the kind folks at OPNIX would like to tell us something we don't know about BGP. After all, they did manage to create a new tier.
"Static" certainly isn't the right word -- I'll agree with that. The marketing department apparently liked it. :) Again, just as with all the "Tier-n" garbage, that language will be changed in the new version of the web site. However, the point is simply that BGP4 makes routing decisions based on AS hops. Yet, AS hops really don't mean anything when it comes to performance. The stuff that matters is things like latency, packet loss, etc... Granted, more AS hops MIGHT have more latency/packet loss, but that's not always the case. :)
--- John "Kill the marketing people" Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
-- ~Jay .. .. .. Jay Jacobson Chief Executive Officer .. .. Opnix, Inc. http://opnix.com .. .. .. .. Innovating Internet Intelligence .. .. ..
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Jay wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, John Fraizer wrote:
The last time I checked, BGP4 didn't do _ANTHING_ static. Perhaps the kind folks at OPNIX would like to tell us something we don't know about BGP. After all, they did manage to create a new tier.
"Static" certainly isn't the right word -- I'll agree with that. The marketing department apparently liked it. :) Again, just as with all the "Tier-n" garbage, that language will be changed in the new version of the web site.
However, the point is simply that BGP4 makes routing decisions based on AS hops. Yet, AS hops really don't mean anything when it comes to performance. The stuff that matters is things like latency, packet loss, etc... Granted, more AS hops MIGHT have more latency/packet loss, but that's not always the case. :)
Jay, You'll be hard pressed to find a border router of a BGP speaker that makes routing decisions based soley on AS path length. There are many variables that a peer can take into account to decide best-path and most of us use those variables to "shape" traffic in some way-shape-form. I suspect that your new technology simply adds another variable to the best-path-selection process based on your ping/traceroute script RTT's to a specific network based on what you have divolged thusfar. If this is in fact the case, I have two problems with the technology: (1) To interwork with existing routers, it has to do ebgp-multihop to peers and then send its tables to the "REAL routers." This adds a point of failure to the mix. (subtract several 9's) (2) In order to have an ACCURATE picture of the global internet, your software will have to constantly probe remote networks to establish the best RTT path which in turn will create N^routing_table_size traffic on at least ONE link (if you do it the lazy way) and N*X^routing_table_size traffic if your do it from multiple points to establish a "mean RTT". Both of the above have CONS which outweigh any potential benefit that may be obtained and the second has the potential, if deployed on any large scale, to create a 1:10,000(+) S:N ratio on the internet as a whole as every router aggressively seeks out a better path to the each network. My alcohol induced deductions based on the limited information you have provided lead me to believe that your product, if it in any way is like I imagine it to be, will do more harm than good and as such, should be squashed like a fly. Feel free to embarrass me by releasing the protocol and showing that what you're doing is in no way like what I have outlined above. --- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001, John Fraizer wrote: [snip]
My alcohol induced deductions based on the limited information you have provided lead me to believe that your product, if it in any way is like I imagine it to be, will do more harm than good and as such, should be squashed like a fly.
Feel free to embarrass me by releasing the protocol and showing that what you're doing is in no way like what I have outlined above.
... and just elaborating on John's point - I'm sure we've all been burnt in the past by "fabulous new technologies" and so we are now hardened skeptics when it comes to proprietary technologies. Which isn't to say its good. Believe me, I'm sure quite a lot of us would absolutely love you if your technology was proven to be a big win. The trouble with it being a "big win" isn't just having it work, but having it released so that the rest of us can find possible holes and fill them. But then, the openness, feedback and ensuring patents can stop something cool and new like this from actually being _deployed_. Remember, just because something is open, doesn't mean your profits are less. Further proof of this is left as an exercise to the reader. :-) Adrian -- Adrian Chadd "Romance novel?" <adrian@creative.net.au> "Girl Porn." - http://www.sinfest.net/d/20010202.html
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 11:33:53AM -0800, Paul Vixie wrote:
dan@netrail.net ("Daniel L. Golding") writes:
I would suspect Savvis, perhaps, or Epoch? Curt is certainly not involved with NetRail in any way.
I just liked the description, "small tier-1".
(I guess if you have a PC and a modem, you're tier-1 now?)
Don't go ruining the illusions of the /. crowd... everyone knows you need 2 PCs to be a tr00 t13r 0n3 -- John Payne http://www.sackheads.org/jpayne/ john@sackheads.org http://www.sackheads.org/uce/ Fax: +44 870 0547954 To send me mail, use the address in the From: header
On 19 Feb 2001, Paul Vixie wrote:
dan@netrail.net ("Daniel L. Golding") writes:
I would suspect Savvis, perhaps, or Epoch? Curt is certainly not involved with NetRail in any way.
I just liked the description, "small tier-1".
(I guess if you have a PC and a modem, you're tier-1 now?)
Hey! No fair. I'm an ISP with a few servers and no infrastructure. Why don't I get to be a Tier-1?! -- I'm being told I have lost the respect of some of my acquaintances in the anti-spam camp. That's a shame, as these are people I respect, people whose friendship I have enjoyed, in some cases for several years. However, it's not going to change my mind, and I resent the implication by some people that I'm not doing enough to fight spam. Thank you.
participants (15)
-
Adrian Chadd -
Alex Bligh -
Alex Rubenstein -
Daniel Golding -
Daniel L. Golding
-
Jay -
John Fraizer -
John Payne -
Majdi S. Abbas -
Mike Lewinski -
Neil J. McRae -
Paul Vixie -
Steve Sobol -
Steven J. Sobol
-
Troy Corbin