|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering
>From the sound of things, it seems that C&W might have been better off migrating AS3561 into AS3967, not the other way around ;) I am assuming that the reasons it's not happening like this are much more political than technical. -C On Tue, Mar 26, 2002 at 10:18:04AM -0800, Bill Woodcock wrote: > > On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote: > > You mean Exodus are well connected and C&W limit themselves which gives > > longer paths and increased latency. > > Longer paths definitely, increased jitter probably, increased latency > probably, increased loss possibly. > > C&W obviously have to have a lot of peering as well, since it's all they > have to sell to their customers. However, their peering tends to be > limited to a small number of peers to whom they have large connections, > whereas Exodus had a large number of peers to whom they had medium-sized > connections. So the average hop-count and as-path length for the Internet > as a whole are both increased by this action, and nearly all paths > increase in length for Exodus customers. So yes, Exodus customers are the > big losers in the wake of this. > > -Bill > >
|