Re: Internet Backbone Index

[Tim Flavin <tim () i1 net>]

On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Gary Zimmerman wrote:

> 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.

==============================================================
Tim Flavin              Internet Access for St Louis & Chicago
Internet 1st, Inc       Toll Free Sales & Support 800-875-3173
http://www.i1.net       For more information email info () i1 net
==============================================================

> 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
>
>
> ----------
> > From: Sean Donelan <SEAN () SDG DRA COM>
> > To: nanog () merit edu
> > Subject: Re: Internet Backbone Index
> > Date: Tuesday, July 08, 1997 3:55 PM
> >
> > > I would really like to know how Boardwatch can continually say Savvis is
> a
> > > national backbone provider when they peer with nobody, and that is part
> of
> > > their business plan, and only buy transit from the big 5.  Then they
> > > neglect to list DRA as a backbone provider, when DRA appears at many
> major
> > > exchanges and peers with damn near everyone under the sun from what I
> can
> > Publisher's perogative.
> >
> > I'm always amused when the latest edition of the Boardwatch ISP directory
> > comes out.  Fortunately, DRA's target markets are libraries and other
> > information providers, not ISPs, although we have a few ISPs as
> customers.
> > Even though DRA tried to provide accurate information to Boardwatch, it
> > always seems to get mangled in the Boardwatch editorial process.  For
> > example, in the latest issue DRA's listing says we have a 0.099 Mbps
> > connection with Sprint.  I don't know how to even order a 0.099 Mbps
> > connection.  In a previous issue Boardwatch said DRA sold dialup
> connections
> > for $19.95/month, even though we had told Boardwatch DRA didn't offer
> > any dialup services.  At least Boardwatch no longer lists Sean Doran as
> > the chief engineer for InternetMCI.
> >
> > After awhile one gets tired of trying to correct other people's mistakes
> > over and over again.  Maybe I should start following the InternetMCI
> model,
> > and claim everything is a big secret.
> > -- 
> > Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
> >   Affiliation given for identification not representation