Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts
Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Mon Nov 3 09:51:06 UTC 2008
On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:26:59 +0100, Florian Weimer said:
> * Patrick W. Gilmore:
> > 3. Standard transit contracts do not guarantee full connectivity
>
> If this were true, why would end users (or, more generally, not
> significantly multi-homed networks) buy transit from such networks?
Quite frankly, if any potential transit provider tried to make noises about
being able to *guarantee* full connectivity, I'd show him the door.
Consider the average length of an AS path. Now consider that your AS is
at one end, your transit provider is the next hop - and there's often 5 or 6
or more AS hops past that. And that potential transit provider has
absolutely *no* control over what some backhoe just did to connectivity
4 AS down the path...
For example, look at the traceroute from my desktop to where your mail
originated:
traceroute to 212.9.189.177 (212.9.189.177), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 isb-6509-1.vl103.cns.vt.edu (128.173.12.1) 0.394 ms 0.712 ms 0.791 ms
2 isb-6509-2.po51.cns.vt.edu (128.173.0.5) 0.597 ms 0.681 ms 0.756 ms
3 isb-7606-2.ge1-1.cns.vt.edu (192.70.187.218) 0.740 ms 0.709 ms 0.687 ms
4 192.70.187.10 (192.70.187.10) 7.590 ms 7.610 ms 7.647 ms
5 te2-1--580.tr01-asbnva01.transitrail.net (137.164.131.177) 89.583 ms 89.618 ms 89.797 ms
6 llnw-peer.asbnva01.transitrail.net (137.164.130.30) 11.956 ms 9.450 ms 9.473 ms
7 ve5.fr3.iad.llnw.net (69.28.171.213) 17.243 ms 9.689 ms 17.443 ms
8 * * *
9 FRA-3-eth0-403.de.lambdanet.net (81.209.156.9) 99.266 ms 99.180 ms 99.163 ms
10 FRA-1-eth000.de.lambdanet.net (217.71.96.69) 98.342 ms 98.436 ms 98.283 ms
11 STU-3-pos330.de.lambdanet.net (217.71.96.82) 111.748 ms 111.764 ms 107.438 ms
12 bond0.border2.LF.net (212.9.160.73) 104.380 ms 104.404 ms 104.262 ms
13 em1.core.LF.net (212.9.160.65) 104.622 ms 104.761 ms 104.504 ms
14 dsl-gw.ispeg.de (212.9.161.26) 106.013 ms 105.999 ms 105.973 ms
15 dsl.enyo.de (213.178.172.64) 135.094 ms 136.729 ms 136.007 ms
Are you saying that you'd accept a contract where ispeg.de or LF.net are making
claims they can guarantee connectivity to AS1312 no matter what transitrail
is doing? (I admit being surprised - I was *expecting* the traceroute to
go through Level3 or Sprint, actually. When did lambdanet land in DE? ;)
(And the real kicker - if transitrail burps, is ispeg or LF able to find us
via our Level3 or Sprint connections? Maybe, maybe not...)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20081103/98c2239e/attachment.sig>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list