Internet Backbone Index

Sean did not know that Peering is what makes you a National Backbone
Provider. It may make you what has been coined as a tier 1 provider, but I
do not see that this can scale as more companies access the net. If you
remember at the Nanog meeting, Randy address this model of 2 to 5
peers/transits if I remember the discuss and that is what we are doing at
SAVVIS. Fortunately Our target markets are not just libraries and other
information providers, it's EVERYONE that needs a T1 and above connection
to the Internet. How many cities are you in Sean, where are DRA's POPs for
customers to access? How much bandwidth does DRA have to get these
customer to other network? Let's compare bandwidth shall we.

When 80 to 90 percent of the Internet traffic is to MCI, SPRINT and UUNET
then our model is the right way to build this, not to try and see how many
peering agreements one can get.

You are right about our model, IT WORKS.

Gary Zimmerman
V.P. of Network Engineering
Savvis Communications Corp.
email: garyz@savvis.com
http://www.savvis.com
Office: 314.719.2423
Address: 7777 Bonhomme Suite 1000
               St. Louis, MO 63105

Sean did not know that Peering is what makes you a National Backbone
Provider.

It doesn't, but having a national backbone that your customers can use
sure does. Peering, in my opinion, only make that network better.

It may make you what has been coined as a tier 1 provider, but I
do not see that this can scale as more companies access the net. If you
remember at the Nanog meeting, Randy address this model of 2 to 5
peers/transits if I remember the discuss and that is what we are doing at
SAVVIS. Fortunately Our target markets are not just libraries and other
information providers, it's EVERYONE that needs a T1 and above connection
to the Internet. How many cities are you in Sean, where are DRA's POPs for
customers to access?

Sean can obviously speak for himself, but I beleive they are in 27
countries and several cities in the US. I have spoken with many of the
fine folks at DRA and have seen first hand how their network functions and
am quite impressed.

How much bandwidth does DRA have to get these
customer to other network? Let's compare bandwidth shall we.

Let's not, let's compare how well that bandwidth is managed. I can hear
DRA routes through all my various connections in all the cities I'm
located, through all the various peering and/or transit connections.

Now, Savvis on the other hand selectivly announces their routes to their
various NSP's, and those are not equal announcments as I travel one
backbone to get to customer A, and yet a totally different backbone to get
to customer B, and even so far as to goto a different city to get to
customer C of yours. So if I cannot get to customer C in St Louis unless
I travel UUnet to Chicago to get into your network, makes me think you DO
NOT have a national backbone, but rather are no more than a reseller of
transit such as myself.

Actually, not as myself because my customers can travel my backbone
between cities without heading out to a transit provider when staying
within my customer connections on my network. And I garantee the same can
be said for any true national backbone provider.

When 80 to 90 percent of the Internet traffic is to MCI, SPRINT and UUNET
then our model is the right way to build this, not to try and see how many
peering agreements one can get.

You are right about our model, IT WORKS.

On good days I imagine it might, but I've seen so many problems with your
routing it scares me.

DataXchange purchases transit from uunet, mci & sprint. But we also
aggressively try to peer with those who wish to peer. Gary, you are wrong
to say that 90% of traffic is for uunet, mci or sprint. I have the
statistics on my own network to prove this. Typically we see a breakdown
like this:

MCI 22%
Sprint 7%
UUNET 21%
all other (via peering) 48%

In our opinion since only 52% of the traffic has its best routing thru
uunet, sprint & mci, bi-lateral peering is definately worthwhile.

Best Regards,
Robert Laughlin