[38358] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 95th Percentile again (was RE: C&W Peering Problem?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jlewis@lewis.org)
Sun Jun 3 23:43:45 2001
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 23:41:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: <jlewis@lewis.org>
To: Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net>
Cc: Paul Vixie <vixie@mfnx.net>, <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.33.0106031342330.1596-100000@neon>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0106032339040.3328-100000@redhat1.mmaero.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> > In case this is unclear, AboveNet was the first to do 95th percentile,
> > and UUNet was the first of those who have since followed in Dave Rand's
> > footsteps.
>
> Huh? My recollection is that UU was doing 95th back in 94 or so.
They definitely were. At my first ISP job, we had a usage based UUNet T1
that was billed according to 95th percentile traffic...but once you
started using much of a T1, it was cheaper to just switch over to their
flate rate "full T1" pricing. This was back when you could run a small
ISP and take a full news feed on a single T1 and not fill it.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| I route
System Administrator | therefore you are
Atlantic Net |
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
