|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 22:21:03 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> To: nanog@nanog.org In-Reply-To: <C97F73E15F1F0D48A3AC0C423F8C221A01F0B904@rancor.ad.newedgenetworks.com> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Lasher, Donn wrote: > that enough of a reason to increase hop-count, latencies, etc? In what way is hop-count a valid measurement of network preformance/quality? Today with gigabit links serialisation-delay is a non-issue so hop-count is not important anymore. Regarding your question there, I don't know what size of players you're talking about, but I'd imagine that having 3-4 engineers who knows BGP that can be on-call is actually more expensive compared to less people who needs to know about this and you just buy cheap transit... At least this is true for some small and mid-sized players. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |