| Peering needs to change Sprint is a little man with a big ego. They are no longer a real Internet player and only carry a relatively small amount of the Internet traffic.
The reality is "peering" as we know it needs to go away and all Internet traffic should have economic and actual costs/business measures associated with it based on how long the ISP carries the traffic from source to destination.
Just because you are now a Tier1, doesn't mean you should be. The Tier system is completely broken and needs to be flushed. |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Vitelity VOIP
| said by peeringisdead :
Sprint is a little man with a big ego. They are no longer a real Internet player and only carry a relatively small amount of the Internet traffic. The facts tend to show Sprint has a massive customer base worldwide and is reasonably well peered.
»www.renesys.com/products_service···ple_data
»www.fixedorbit.com/metrics.htm
»www.fixedorbit.com/stats.htm |
|
| said by espaeth:The facts tend to show Sprint has a massive customer base worldwide and is reasonably well peered. That may be true, but the peering is legacy and customer base has been changing over the past few years. Many of these customers are very small or use Sprint for very little data (ask around).
ASN metrics are tricky and not sure they are a complete measurement of an entity proportion of "Internet" volume. e.g 20 ASNs with 200G of data vs 1000 ASNs with a combined total of 160G of data. Which is bigger? |
|
audiog
join:2004-08-09
Detroit, MI | reply to peeringisdead
Tell that to the FCC who wants the cost system to go away because it would cost THE NEW AT&T and VERIZON a lot of money each month. The cost system was based on the terminating carrier (and the peers are carriers ) charging the originating carrier a fee based on a cost model. And the new system favors AT&T and Verizon. The new system that is being hashed out reduces the rates by a factor of 1000 and says that the internet has no cost the terminating carrier when in fact the peering if done by fiber or copper DS interconnects and by FCC rules if they( AT&T and Verizon) say you have to run fiber to me at this point( that is not cost effective to you ) that is your only choice. |
|
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| reply to peeringisdead
said by peeringisdead :
Sprint is a little man with a big ego. They are no longer a real Internet player and only carry a relatively small amount of the Internet traffic.
The reality is "peering" as we know it needs to go away and all Internet traffic should have economic and actual costs/business measures associated with it based on how long the ISP carries the traffic from source to destination.
Just because you are now a Tier1, doesn't mean you should be. The Tier system is completely broken and needs to be flushed.
the reality is cogent routinely tries to violate it's peering agreements by sending more traffic over peering links than they receive. This results in de-peering as it well should. What then happens is cogent then pays the difference it exceeded the peering agreement(as it should) and things go back to normal.
--
God Blesshttp://www.emmanuelcomputerconsulting.com-- carpe ductum -- "Grab the tape" |
|
 53059959Temp banned from BBR more then anyone
join:2002-10-02
PwnZone | reply to espaeth
network neutrality This is sprint trying to create a tiered internet.
They think their traffic is of higher quality then Cogent, so they block Cogent.
All this does is force providers to move away from both companies. |
|
| reply to peeringisdead
Re: Peering needs to change said by peeringisdead :said by espaeth:The facts tend to show Sprint has a massive customer base worldwide and is reasonably well peered. ... Many of these customers are very small or use Sprint for very little data (ask around)... Actually Sprint has large customers that move massive amounts of data, like Coke and Raytheon. |
|
