|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Ungodly packet loss rates
Gordon Cook wrote: > now you may say that from a competitive point of view this makes no > difference. perhaps. But what if the big four no longer see the need to > upgrade their bandwidth INTO and OUT OF exchange points? what happens to > the "secondary ten" when they get some large customers who see their > packects die between Sprints mae east router and the nearest sprint > backbone POP if that pipe is over crowded. Will we hear them complain > about ungodly packet loss and move to the industrial strength service of > the big four who can do hot potato hand offs to each other at multiple > private exchanges around the US and increasingly around the world? if > such is the case, how will the secondary ten ever get enough customers to > convince the top four to let them do private exchanges as well? > > Is this part of an inevitable dynamic that is and will channel market > share into the hands of the top four? Gordon - You're describing the dilemma of any newcomers to the net: Assuming that the new net can get peering agreements at the public ix's (this in itself is not easily assumed) there is still an uphill battle. . If you don't have private interconnects, your traffic goes over the 90% avg. utilized links between the IX point and the large provider's backbone. This makes it difficult to get and keep customers - after all, 75% of the internet is lossy/slow to them, and if they switch to any of the larger providers they don't see that loss. . You can't get a private interconnect with another provider unless you have the traffic (customers) to justify it. See previous point as to why you can't get the customers. Interesting points. Rod - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|