North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Traffic Engineering
> It's my analysis that the problem is that small (T-1 and below) > customers should be buying their connectivity from (and there should > _be_, for them to buy it from) a local exchange-type provider. IE: buy > a T-3 up hill to, oh, say, the top 6 or 10 backbones, and then sell > transit to local ISPs and IAPs in your geographic area. > > This doesn't seem to be technically difficult, and it seems like it > ought to be pretty easy to sell... sure, you're one hop further from > the backbone... but you're now two hops away from _10_. > > Are there any major potholes in this theory that I'm missing? A big problem here is that ISPs differentiate themselves based on who they buy bandwidth from. An ISP that has a T1 to CRL, say, benefits greatly when a larger competitor gets a T1 to CRL as well, but the larger competitor doesn't benefit if they already have multiple T1s and T3s to the larger backbones themselves. A better idea is a miniature NAP for the ISPs in each large metropolitan area for exchanging local traffic. Josh Beck - CONNECTnet Network Operations Center - [email protected] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CONNECTnet INS, Inc. Phone: (619)450-0254 Fax: (619)450-3216 6370 Lusk Blvd., Suite F-208 San Diego, CA 92121 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|