[49504] in North American Network Operators' Group
OT: Total Traffic. Was: Sprint peering policy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rowland, Alan D)
Tue Jul 2 11:50:48 2002
From: "Rowland, Alan D" <alan_r1@corp.earthlink.net>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 08:49:35 -0700
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Richard,
I know a few news server admins who might disagree with you. Or at =
least it
seems that way at times. ;)
I typically have a 251Kbps (broadband) stream from =
www.thebasement.com.au
running in the background when on line. The stream is coming out of
Australia (don't think it's been Akakamized yet. Did I spell that =
right?) so
that stream is on a US backbone. That's in addition to anything else I =
may
be doing. This is only a single point of data but single points =
eventually
add up to a bucket.
Additional thoughts. Wonder what that peak traffic would be if =
individual
sites and services weren't as rate limited as most are by pipe size,
hardware or software? Or how about a 6Gbps HDTV video conference stream
(UCLA (?)- MIT on Internet2).
Just my 2=A2. The delete key is your friend.
-Al Rowland
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard A Steenbergen [mailto:ras@e-gerbil.net]=20
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 6:07 PM
To: Stephen J. Wilcox
Cc: Deepak Jain; Miquel van Smoorenburg; nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: Sprint peering policy
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 12:47:36AM +0100, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
>=20
> I'm curious about all these comments on bandwidth, "few Mbs is=20
> nothing", "dropping OC48 to IXs".
>=20
> Theres an imbalance somewhere, everyone on this list claims to be=20
> switching many gigs of data per second and yet where is it all going? =
> Not on the IX graphs anyway....
>=20
> Did someone mention large bandwidths and everyone else felt they=20
> needed to use similar figures or is everyone really switching that=20
> amount but just hiding it well in private peerings? I know theres =
some=20
> big networks on this list but theres a lot more small ones..
It's all so much posturing, just like the people who claim they need =
OC768
now or any time in the near future, or the people who sell 1Mbps =
customers
on the fact that their OC192 links are important.
If there is more than ~150Gbps of traffic total (counting the traffic =
only
once through the system) going through the US backbones I'd be very
surprised.
--=20
Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> =
http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE =
B6)
