North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering

  • From: Stephen J. Wilcox
  • Date: Tue Mar 26 13:11:17 2002

You mean Exodus are well connected and C&W limit themselves which gives
longer paths and increased latency.

I guess its obvious to us this is bad, but the thing the C&W bosses are
relying on is that it wont be bad enough for Joe Public to notice, and I
very much doubt they will notice :/

Wonder what C&W long term plan is.. at some point they will have very few
peers, a global network and transit customers. Will they then depeer with
someone like Global Crossing in an attempt to force them to buy

We've seen similar upsets in the past but not to attain a business goal,
but I do wonder here what they plan to achieve... !


On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Bill Woodcock wrote:

>       On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Chris Woodfield wrote:
>     > I'm presuming that Exodus is planning to get the transit they need after this
>     > depeering via C&W's peering points? If so, this makes a certain amount of sense - no
>     > need to maintain separate peering circuits.
> The point isn't that merging the networks doesn't make technical sense.
> Of course there's little point in maintaining an overlay network with the
> same AS and separate peering.  The point is that since Exodus had a
> broader, flatter peering mesh than C&W, even if C&W expands their peering
> proportionately to accommodate the increased demand which Exodus' traffic
> will place on their network, it'll still be a net loss in global
> connectivity, since C&W's peering topology is much narrower.  Average path
> lengths increase, the consumer loses.
>                                 -Bill

Stephen J. Wilcox
IP Services Manager, Opal Telecom
Tel: 0161 222 2000
Fax: 0161 222 2008