nanog mailing list archives
Re: Traffic locality and other questions
From: Vadim Antonov <avg () pluris com>
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 1997 15:53:48 -0700
Sean Donelan wrote:
In the last year, the traffic among next-hops has become flatter at the top, and the tail has become longer. The opposite of what I would expect in a market experiencing consolidation.
I have a suspiction that this is because of the limitations of the current backbone technology. I.e. traffic is not determined by aggregate customer demand, but rather by the capacity of backbones' connections to the IXPs. If so, that'll mean that ISPs with larger market share have the poorest bit-transport service; and so boasting about having 60% of market or so is seriously misguided :)
What I find interesting is the rankings of traffic flows I see don't match with what the pundits rank as the largest network providers. I don't know what that means though.
"Pundit" sounds vaguely scatological for a slavic-speaking person (and very much like Russian "pizdit", a rude word meaning "[he] bullshits", fortified with reference to female genitalia). I'm sure there must be some deeper meaning in that :) Thanks for posting the real data, Sean! --vadim
Current thread:
- Traffic locality and other questions Sean Donelan (Sep 22)
- Re: Traffic locality and other questions Kent W. England (Sep 22)
- Re: Traffic locality and other questions Klaus Landefeld (Sep 22)
- Re: Traffic locality and other questions Vadim Antonov (Sep 22)
- Message not available
- Re: Traffic locality and other questions Jay R. Ashworth (Sep 23)
- Message not available
- Re: Traffic locality and other questions Kent W. England (Sep 22)
- Re: Traffic locality and other questions Sean M. Doran (Sep 25)
- Re: Traffic locality and other questions Vadim Antonov (Sep 25)