North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts

  • From: Valdis . Kletnieks
  • Date: Mon Nov 03 04:52:31 2008 
On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:26:59 +0100, Florian Weimer said:
> * Patrick W. Gilmore:

> > 3. Standard transit contracts do not guarantee full connectivity
> 
> If this were true, why would end users (or, more generally, not
> significantly multi-homed networks) buy transit from such networks?

Quite frankly, if any potential transit provider tried to make noises about
being able to *guarantee* full connectivity, I'd show him the door.

Consider the average length of an AS path.  Now consider that your AS is
at one end, your transit provider is the next hop - and there's often 5 or 6
or more AS hops past that.  And that potential transit provider has
absolutely *no* control over what some backhoe just did to connectivity
4 AS down the path...

For example, look at the traceroute from my desktop to where your mail
originated:

traceroute to 212.9.189.177 (212.9.189.177), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
 1  isb-6509-1.vl103.cns.vt.edu (128.173.12.1)  0.394 ms  0.712 ms  0.791 ms
 2  isb-6509-2.po51.cns.vt.edu (128.173.0.5)  0.597 ms  0.681 ms  0.756 ms
 3  isb-7606-2.ge1-1.cns.vt.edu (192.70.187.218)  0.740 ms  0.709 ms  0.687 ms
 4  192.70.187.10 (192.70.187.10)  7.590 ms  7.610 ms  7.647 ms
 5  te2-1--580.tr01-asbnva01.transitrail.net (137.164.131.177)  89.583 ms  89.618 ms  89.797 ms
 6  llnw-peer.asbnva01.transitrail.net (137.164.130.30)  11.956 ms  9.450 ms  9.473 ms
 7  ve5.fr3.iad.llnw.net (69.28.171.213)  17.243 ms  9.689 ms  17.443 ms
 8  * * *
 9  FRA-3-eth0-403.de.lambdanet.net (81.209.156.9)  99.266 ms  99.180 ms  99.163 ms
10  FRA-1-eth000.de.lambdanet.net (217.71.96.69)  98.342 ms  98.436 ms  98.283 ms
11  STU-3-pos330.de.lambdanet.net (217.71.96.82)  111.748 ms  111.764 ms  107.438 ms
12  bond0.border2.LF.net (212.9.160.73)  104.380 ms  104.404 ms  104.262 ms
13  em1.core.LF.net (212.9.160.65)  104.622 ms  104.761 ms  104.504 ms
14  dsl-gw.ispeg.de (212.9.161.26)  106.013 ms  105.999 ms  105.973 ms
15  dsl.enyo.de (213.178.172.64)  135.094 ms  136.729 ms  136.007 ms

Are you saying that you'd accept a contract where ispeg.de or LF.net are making
claims they can guarantee connectivity to AS1312 no matter what transitrail
is doing?  (I admit being surprised - I was *expecting* the traceroute to
go through Level3 or Sprint, actually. When did lambdanet land in DE? ;)

(And the real kicker - if transitrail burps, is ispeg or LF able to find us
via our Level3 or Sprint connections?  Maybe, maybe not...)

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature