BBN Peering issues

Dan Ritter dsr at
Thu Aug 13 19:15:54 UTC 1998

At 12:10 PM 19980813 -0700, Robert Bowman wrote:
>I am referring to output of Exodus traffic relative to input of BBN traffic,
>not vice versa.  Exodus consumes very little of BBN's output (Exodus input).
>Isn't that the "supposed" problem?  Our private exchange statistics show it
>very simply, if BBN disconnects, it will drop our traffic by 1.85%.  I cannot
>speak for certain about BBN's traffic input as an aggregate, that is why
>I stated below that we are estimating.

>> >off.  Let's face the facts, BBN is only 1.85% of my traffic.  By all accounts,
>> >we estimate to be in the area of 10-30% of their traffic.  Lots of luck.  We
>> >actually see a massively inverted benefit scale in this particular situation.

It seems intuitively reasonable to me that 1.85% of Exodus input comes from BBN.
No arguments there. I would like to know where the "By all accounts, we estimate
to be in the area of 10-30% of their traffic." sentence comes from. Are you suggesting
that 10-30% of BBN's total output goes to Exodus? Or that 10-30% of Exodus output
goes to BBN?

The first scenario is ridiculous. The second scenario is possible, but I would suspect
it is closer to 10% than 30%.


...Still not speaking for the company...

More information about the NANOG mailing list