nanog mailing list archives
Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering
From: Bill Woodcock <woody () zocalo net>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 09:37:11 -0800 (PST)
On Tue, 26 Mar 2002, Chris Woodfield wrote: > I'm presuming that Exodus is planning to get the transit they need after this > depeering via C&W's peering points? If so, this makes a certain amount of sense - no > need to maintain separate peering circuits. The point isn't that merging the networks doesn't make technical sense. Of course there's little point in maintaining an overlay network with the same AS and separate peering. The point is that since Exodus had a broader, flatter peering mesh than C&W, even if C&W expands their peering proportionately to accommodate the increased demand which Exodus' traffic will place on their network, it'll still be a net loss in global connectivity, since C&W's peering topology is much narrower. Average path lengths increase, the consumer loses. -Bill
Current thread:
- Exodus/C&W Depeering Chris Parker (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Chris Woodfield (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering German Martinez (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Joseph T. Klein (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Bill Woodcock (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Bill Woodcock (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Allan Liska (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Stephen J. Wilcox (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Bill Woodcock (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Chris Woodfield (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Bill Woodcock (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Jesper Skriver (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Hank Nussbacher (Mar 26)
- RE: Exodus/C&W Depeering Deepak Jain (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Bill Woodcock (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering German Martinez (Mar 26)
- Re: Exodus/C&W Depeering Chris Woodfield (Mar 26)