Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage

From: Joe Greco (no email)
Date: Sun Nov 02 2008 - 10:49:42 EST

  • Next message: Larry Sheldon: "Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage"

    > > But seriously, it shouldn't be necessary to have two connections at
    > > work, two connections at home, two connections for each mobile device,
    > > just to ensure that when large providers stop working together you can
    > > still reach what you need to reach.
    >
    > I think you're misinterpreting what I'm trying to say.
    >
    > The consumers/end-users don't necessarily have to multihome. The problem is
    > the content providers/web hosters sitting single-homed on either networks,
    > when most of them are physically sitting in better environment to multihome
    > (i.e. a datacenter) than consumers.
    >
    > A consumer can be single homed to Sprint or Cogent, but when the other side
    > (the content) is multihomed, you'll simply take new route to get to that
    > content. My point is, any business providing services over internet (this
    > excludes mobile devices, end-user/consumers) should be multihoming
    > themselves if they are serious about uptime.

    So my Sprint EVDO (hypothetical, not real) can't get to the DSL line I've
    got through $cheap-Cogent-bandwidth-DSL-provider (also hypothetical, not
    something I have, but I know of such a provider. Given they're not at
    fault in this dispute, I will not name them.) So what you're saying is
    that I'm expected ... to go get myself some space in a data center so that
    I can buy some more Internet connectivity in the data center so that I can
    bounce my VPN connection from my laptop to my home office via the data
    center?

    That's insane.

    Let's try to remember that the Internet isn't the sort of "content provider"
    and "end-user" thing you're pretending it is. This model is loosely true
    for some large percentage of traffic, but it is by no means the only usage
    model.

    Further, why should content networks be taxed extra in the manner you
    suggest?

    Are you willing to mandate that customers in Sprint and Cogent colocation
    centers must be offered reasonable pricing on connections to alternate
    providers?

    You really don't want all your content providers multihoming in any case,
    there are far too many of them, and encouraging each one to solve its own
    connectivity problem will result in an explosion of the routing table.

    ... JG

    -- 
    Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
    "We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I
    won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN)
    With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
    

  • Next message: Larry Sheldon: "Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD