PSINet/Cogent Latency

Tue Jul 23 03:30:34 UTC 2002

With the price of transit where it is today:
#1 Transit is often cheaper than peering (if you factor in port costs on
public exchanges, or link costs for private exchanges)
#2 The difference in price is likely not large enough for me to risk:
saturation, latency, etc...

My customers pay me to provide them a premium service, and I see value
in providing that service.

Some people have no problem selling cogent -- what can I say... You get
what you pay for...

And no, I'm not trolling.  Is having a different opinion not allowed
now?

And 40mbit over a 45mbit circuit, if it is to an uplink/peer -- well, if
he has customers who are connected at 100mbit switched uncapped (likely)
-- then many customers (possibly even some DSL customers...) can flood
off his peer links with only a 5mbit stream.

--Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Wallingford [mailto:brian at meganet.net] 
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 11:13 PM
To: Phil Rosenthal
Cc: 'Alex Rubenstein'; nanog at merit.edu
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency

Good for you, Phil.  Chime in again when you've got something useful to
offer.

In the meantime, you may want to review Economics 101 along with certain
queueing schemes, especially RED (no, I'm not endorsing the idea of 
oversubscribing to the extreme, but then again, neither was Alex).

Also, re-read the previous post.  There's a big difference between
choice and facility.

Did you grow up spending Summers in the Hamptons with no conception of
the value of a dollar, or are you simply trolling?

-brian

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Phil Rosenthal wrote:

:
:Actually, I wouldn't think about getting T1, DS3 or OC3 in the first
:place ;) :Oc-12 is the minimum link I would even look at -- and my
preference is :gig-e... Even if there is only 90 megs on the
interface...
:
:--Phil
:
:-----Original Message-----
:From: Alex Rubenstein [mailto:alex at nac.net] 
:Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 10:02 PM
:To: Phil Rosenthal
:Cc: nanog at merit.edu
:Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
:
:
:
:
:On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
:
:>
:> I call any upstream link 'over capacity' if either:
:> 1) There is less than 50mb/s unused
:
:That must work well for T1's and DS3's.
:
:
:> 2) The circuit is more than 50% in use
:
:I call it 'over capacity' too, but that doesn't mean all the ducks are
:in a row to get both sides to realise an upgrade is needed, and even if
:they do realise it, to actually get it done. I am sure 2238092 people
on :this list can complain of the same problem.
:
:So, what do you do? You monitor it's usage, making adjustments to make
:sure it doesn't get clobbered. You can easily run DS-3s at 35 to 40
:mbit/sec, with little to none increase in latency from the norm. Many
:people do this as well, even up to OC12 or higher levels all the time.
:
:
:
:
:> I guess by my definition a DS3 is always 'over capacity'
:
:Which must work very well for those DS3's doing 10 to 20 mb/s. Do you
:upgrade those to OC3 or beyond?
:
:
:-- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex at nac.net, latency, Al Reuben --
:--    Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net   --
:
:
:
: