Exodus/C&W Depeering

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
21

    > 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.

In general, as companies and backbones merge and eliminate "old" ASNs, that would reduce the overall AS path length. That in general should not affect latency but as tier-1 ASNs grow in size, and control more of the path end to end, the latency should improve. The majors/tier1s like AT&T, UUnet, Genuity and C&W provide SLAs "end-to-end" *within* their ASN. They control the pipes, they know what they can take and they don't have to worry about some overloaded peering link. So as consolidation takes place, we should see better latencies and better SLAs.

-Hank

22

to end, the latency should improve. The majors/tier1s like AT&T, UUnet,
Genuity and C&W provide SLAs "end-to-end" *within* their ASN. They control
the pipes, they know what they can take and they don't have to worry about
some overloaded peering link. So as consolidation takes place, we should
see better latencies and better SLAs.

23

This isn't something I really care to make a big argument of, but my point
was that for many ISPs, the path will go from:

   SELF - EXODUS

to:

   SELF - OTHER BACKBONE - C&W

for a net increase in average path length. That is, of course, a gross
generalization. And not anything I'm trying to make a big point of.

                                -Bill

24

They did?

Christian

25

'peering partners' == (paid) transit providers?

-a