Variety, On The Media, don't understand the Internet

Patrick W. Gilmore patrick at ianai.net
Wed May 15 01:24:28 UTC 2013


On May 14, 2013, at 21:14 , Jean-Francois Mezei <jfmezei_nanog at vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 13-05-14 20:55, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:

>> Since when is peering not part of the Internet? 
> 
> Yes, one car argue that an device with an IP address routable from the
> internet is part of the internet.

Can argue? How would you define the Internet?


> But when traffic from a cahe server flows directly into an ISP's
> intranet to end users, it doesn't really make use of the "Internet" nor
> does it cost the ISP transit capacity.

Transit capacity != "Internet".

Plus you said even peering wasn't the Internet.


> Compare this to a small ISP in a city where there are no cache servers.
> Reaching netfix involves using paid transit to reach the nearest point
> where Netflix has a cache server. So traffic truly travels on the internet.

"Truly"? You have interesting definitions.

I think you are trying to say "small ISPs have to pay to access $CONTENT, big ones do not". This is objectively false-to-fact.

If you are trying to say scale makes some things easier, then I'm sure most people would agree. But trying to define the Internet as transit capacity, or saying small ISPs can't peer, or anything of the sort is silly.

-- 
TTFN,
patrick




More information about the NANOG mailing list