Internet Backbone Index

Jack Rickard jack.rickard at
Fri Jun 27 23:41:51 UTC 1997

> From: Ben Black <black at>
> To: Jack Rickard <jack.rickard at>
> Cc: Justin W. Newton <justin at>; nanog at
> Subject: Re: Internet Backbone Index
> Date: Friday, June 27, 1997 7:07 PM
> On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Jack Rickard wrote:
> > 
> > I don't think I'm missing it.  I think I'm disagreeing with it in as
> > and nonconfrontational a way as I can given the crappy personality I
> apparently your definition of nonconfrontational includes calling people 
> morons.  i think i will expand my definition of "editor" to include 
> clueless network engineer wannabes.

As I recall, you specifically began the name calling episode.

> > to work from.  Splitting hairs from here to infinity on what "network"
> > means and what the world wide web is departs rather widely from my
> > here, so I'm giving it short shrift.  If you don't know how ping and
> > traceroute vary from data flows, I can't help much there either.  
> > 
> since you obviously don't know a thing about how things like peering, 
> NAPs, IP routing, and all the other components of network engineering 
> work, i this it humorous.

Actually I know quite a bit about them.  If it is obvious to you otherwise,
it becomes rather obvious that you don't.

> > If you want to draw a line of demarcation between a network and its
> > performance, and a web server and its performance, you're free to do
so.  I
> > just probably won't buy into it.
> > 
> and we probably wouldn't either.  but since that isn't what anyone is 
> doing, how is this relevant?
> > On the actual concept that changing all the web servers will move the
> > numbers: It might.  It might not.  I would probably bet at this point
> > there will be a lot of that going on among the non-moron crowd.  I'm
> > of hoping for it anyway.  And then we'll see if the numbers move.  My
> > is that they will move some, and not as much as most seem to think. 
> > it's true it could go the other way and be dramatic.  I'm open to
> > results derive.  
> > 
> so you are hoping backbone providers move their own home page web servers

> in order to skew a severely limited and obviously bogus benchmark?  if it

> is as easy as that to change the results, don't you think perhaps there 
> is something radically wrong with your methodology?  wouldn't that seem 
> to indicate this so-called benchmark isn't really testing what it 
> purports to?

I don't think it will be that easy, which if you could read you would see
in the comments you quoted.  No, I don't think there is something radically
wrong with the methodology.  I have no hopes for what providers do.  They
can do whatever they like.  We will continue to publish test results.  How
they react to them is no affair of mine. 


More information about the NANOG mailing list