|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: T1 vs. T2 [WAS: Apology: [Tier-2 reachability and multihoming]]
here is what i answered a private message on the subject, with a typo corrected. [un]fortunately, i seem not to have saved the follow-on mess age where i suggested how one could get a good first cut at this from route-views data. randy --- From: Randy Bush <[email protected]> Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 22:17:03 -0800 To: a nanogian Subject: Re: Apology: [Re: Tier-2 reachability and multihoming] > ...which I read to mean you believe there is a measurement or a > demonstration (performance-wise or topology-wise) to support at least > two classes of networks. I'm not arguing, but I am curious since you are > indicating you believe its demonstrable. read, for example, the paper trail i cited earlier in this thread. > What measures do you believe are most indicative of a "better" network? better? i did not say better. a simple way to look at it, which we have repeated here every year since com-priv migrated here is a tier-1 network does not get transit prefixes from any other network and peers with, among others, other tier-1 networks. a tier-2 gets transit of some form from another network, usually but not necessarily a tier-1, and may peer with other networks. this does not please everyone, especially folk who buy transit and don't like discussing it. and there are kinky corners (if i have the bad taste to tunnel through someone, that is not transit). but it does not make one network 'better' than another. for our biwa office (where my employer has no presence), the best network is one where i know the ceo, so can get something fixed if i need to panic and the csr does not cut it. randy
|