the Internet Backbone

From: Paul Ferguson <>
>>Last time this term came up, I opined that there was no "backbone" any more
>>and that 1996's Internet had a "hairball topology." Vadim, among others,
>>disagreed with me but we didn't pursue the topic. Perhaps we should have.
>Well, "backbone" is too vague. I rather prefer to think of Internet
>topology as of "tiers". The nodes in upper-levels cast "cones of
>influence" in lower tiers. Nodes from lower tiers belonging to
>different cones of influence do not generally speak to each other,
>and so have to purchase transit from higher tiers.

Well, I kind of liked the term 'blobs' [credit to Jerry Scharf]. :slight_smile:

I agree with Paul Vixie, there is no true backbone, although there are
two possible contenders for the title.

Tiers were called "bubbles" by Noel Chiappa, if I remember correctly.

I rather like bubbles instead of cones or tiers, as it matches the old
political "spheres of influence".
    Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32
    Key fingerprint = 2E 07 23 03 C5 62 70 D3 59 B1 4F 5E 1D C2 C1 A2