[180089] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Peering and Network Cost
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Taht)
Thu May 21 12:59:13 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <552EA4F1.5010700@netassist.ua>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 09:59:09 -0700
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Max Tulyev <maxtul@netassist.ua>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Max Tulyev <maxtul@netassist.ua> wrote:
> Hi Roderick,
>
> transit cost is lowering close to peering cost, so it is doubghtful
> economy on small channels. If you don't live in
> Amsterdam/Frankfurt/London - add the DWDM cost from you to one of major
> IX. That's the magic.
>
> In large scale peering is still efficient. It is efficient on local
> traffic which is often huge.
Two things I am curious about are 1) What is the measured benefit of
moving a netflix server into your local ISP network
and 2) does anyone measure "cross town latency". If we lived in a
world where skype/voip/etc transited the local town only,
what sort of latencies would be see within an ISP and within a
cross-connect from, say a gfiber to a comcast?
Once upon a time I'd heard that most phone calls were within 6 miles
of the person's home, but I don't remember the breakdown of those call
percentages (?), and certainly the old-style phone system was
achieving very low latencies for those kinds of traffic.
> On 04/15/15 17:28, Rod Beck wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> As you all know, transit costs in the wholesale market today a few perce=
nt of what it did in 2000. I assume that most of that decline is due to a m=
odified version of Moore's Law (I don't believe optics costs decline 50% ev=
ery 18 months) and the advent of maverick players like Cogent that broker c=
ozy oligopoly pricing.
>>
>>
>> But I also wondering whether the advent of widespread peering (promiscuo=
us?) among the Tier 2 players (buy transit and peer) has played a role. In =
2000 peering was still an exclusive club and in contrast today Tier 2 playe=
rs often have hundreds of peers. Peering should reduce costs and also deman=
d in the wholesale IP market. Supply increases and demand falls.
>>
>>
>> I thank you in advance for any insights.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> - R.
>>
>>
>> Roderick Beck
>> Sales Director/Europe and the Americas
>> Hibernia Networks
>>
>> This e-mail and any attachments thereto is intended only for use by the =
addressee(s) named herein and may be proprietary and/or legally privileged.=
If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notif=
ied that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email, and any =
attachments thereto, without the prior written permission of the sender is =
strictly prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please immediatel=
y telephone or e-mail the sender and permanently delete the original copy a=
nd any copy of this e-mail, and any printout thereof. All documents, contra=
cts or agreements referred or attached to this e-mail are SUBJECT TO CONTRA=
CT. The contents of an attachment to this e-mail may contain software virus=
es that could damage your own computer system. While Hibernia Networks has =
taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, we cannot accept l=
iability for any damage that you sustain as a result of software viruses. Y=
ou should carry out your
>
> own virus checks before opening any attachment.
>>
>
--=20
Dave T=C3=A4ht
Open Networking needs **Open Source Hardware**
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+EricRaymond/posts/JqxCe2pFr67
