[1367] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Will ANS connect to CIX? Why is this a difficult question?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Davis)
Wed Sep 18 14:50:06 1991
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1991 14:48:23 -0400
From: Christopher Davis <ckd@eff.org>
To: steve@ncri.cise.nsf.gov (Stephen Wolff)
Cc: com-priv@uu.psi.com
In-Reply-To: steve@ncri.cise.nsf.gov's message of 18 Sep 91 16:36:12 GMT
ckd> I find it hard to believe that a T1 connection (or two) to the CIX can
ckd> somehow pass enough traffic to choke a T3 network.
SW> Guess I've got two responses to that.
SW> I find it hard to believe that a straw can break a camel's back,
SW> too. 'Course that's probably not relevant. Yet.
If a single T1 can add enough traffic to bring down a multiple-T3
network, then the T3 network needs to be upgraded. After all, what will
ANSnet's next customer do, if they want a T1?
Yes, this means there is cost involved with supporting that incremental
increase in traffic. I'm not saying there isn't. However, the CIX
costs are should be treated as as much a part of the infrastructure as
any other portion of the ANSnet backbone.
SW> Let's see: A T3 is about 28 T1s. How many do you think ANS should
SW> carry free?
Free? All of the traffic going to/from the CIX would have to, by the
system's design, be going from or to an ANSnet customer (even if the
customer is several times removed by way of midlevels, etc). After all,
ANSnet only has to advertise the routes they want to advertise to the
CIX.
Example: AlterNet has routes to NEARnet. However, those routes are not
advertised (as far as I know) to the other CIX members, and traffic from
(say) PSInet to NEARnet goes over the NSFNET.
Even assuming that someone on the ANSnet side is ftping something huge
(X11R6?) from a CIX member's network, that's still an ANSnet customer
loading down the link (which, presumably, means that ANS should make
sure that there are archives available on their side as well... like,
say, SIMTEL-20. ;-).
Even the "worst case" of CIX customers ftping files from ANSnet sites
means that the ANSnet site made those files available, presumably as
part of whatever "mission" they had (MIT and the X Consortium, say), and
the traffic is therefore still supported by an ANS customer.
I don't see where fears of "through traffic" could come from, given the
routing architecture, and any "local traffic" would, by definition, be
mutual: both ANS and the CIX would be *exchanging* it on behalf of
*their customers*.
Christopher Davis <ckd@eff.org> | ELECTRONIC MAIL WORDS OF WISDOM #5:
System Manager & Postmaster | "Internet mail headers are
Electronic Frontier Foundation | not unlike giblets."
+1 617 864 0665 NIC: [CKD1] | -- Brian Reid <reid@decwrl.dec.com>
