"potential new and different architectural approach" to solve the

Fri Dec 17 17:23:55 UTC 2010

> On Dec 17, 2010, at 9:57 AM, Lor=E1nd Jakab wrote:
> > Since it is Friday, maybe some of peering experts have some time to
> > speculate what this new approach proposed by Comcast might be, as they
> > assert it would represent "a significant shift of Internet =
> infrastructure."
> >=20
> > http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=3D202121
> > =
> http://blog.comcast.com/2010/12/comcast-continues-discussions-with-level-3=
> ----offers-to-trial-new-solutions.html
> 
> I have no direct knowledge of the situation, but my guess:  I suspect =
> the proposal was along the lines of longest-path / best-exit routing by =
> Level(3).  In other words, if L(3) carries the traffic (most of the way) =
> to the customer, then Comcast has no complaint--the costs can be more =
> fairly distributed.  The "modest investment" is probably in tools to =
> evaluate traffic and routing metrics, to make this work.  This isn't =
> really *new* to the peering community, but it isn't normal either.
> 
> If anybody knows for sure, I'd be interested to hear.

How effective have variations on hot potato routing been, historically?
I seem to recall Cogent made lots of noises early on about how they
could do hot potato routing to encourage peering, but over the years
that didn't seem to pan out that way.

... JG
-- 
Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
"We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I
won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN)
With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.