Generation of traffic in "settled" peering arrangement

Alec H. Peterson ahp at
Tue Aug 25 22:21:20 UTC 1998

steve at wrote:
>         That's just how the internet plays, there are probably more sights
> phisically in the silicon valley then anywhere else on the west coast.  It's
> where the busniness's are, and since they want to have their machines as
> close to them as possible, they put them here.

There's some interesting logic.  Don't get me wrong, I understand it (from
the customer's point of view).  However, I think that it would be a good
idea for web farms to start to make it worth the customer's while to
distribute their servers.  It may not be much of a network cost savings from
the web farm's point of view, but it does address some of the traffic
asymmetry issues, on top of improving performance to the end user.

>         On the other hand, the customers who view the sites are spread out
> all over the country (and world).  Therefore replication is a good thing
> for these businesses.  With your servers located all around the country
> (close to private or public peering points) you will get better performance.


>         Of course if there are no public or private peering points located near
> the site, the value would be close to nil, since distribution needs local
> inbound traffic to be worthwhile.

Well, in the world of private interconnects there are private interconnect
points all over the place.  Also, you can always place your colocation
facilities near the public interconnect points.

> Steven O. Noble -- Sr. Backbone Engineer, Exodus Communications (EXDS)


|Alec H. Peterson - ahp at  | Lead Network Architect           |
|              | Erols Internet - an RCN Company  |

More information about the NANOG mailing list