Richard Bennett, NANOG posting, and Integrity

Miles Fidelman mfidelman at meetinghouse.net
Mon Jul 28 12:53:05 UTC 2014


Bill Woodcock wrote:
> On Jul 27, 2014, at 9:39 PM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:
>> Can you say more about what you've done to "survey and quantify" prevailing practices?
> https://www.pch.net/resources/papers//peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011.pdf
>
> We’ll do another one in the run-up to the next OECD carrier interconnection paper.

Interesting study.  Thanks for the pointer.

>> Given that Netflix is reportedly about 1/3 of Internet traffic these days, and Verizon is huge - how does that come out to .27% of cases?
> Netflix/Verizon would be 0.0007% of cases, if it’s represented in the dataset.  The survey was of interconnection norms, not of hugeness.

It is worth noting, though, that not all interconnection are created 
equal.  I wonder how your numbers would come out if you grouped 
interconnection agreements by amount of traffic exchanged, level of 
asymmetry, and so forth.  And then perhaps by level of competition in 
the associated markets (do monopoly carriers behave differently than 
ones where there is a lot of competition?).

Just by analogy, the answer to "what kind of protocol traffic dominates 
the net" (or is "more important") differs considerably if you look at 
bandwidth vs. transactions (last time I looked, admittedly a little 
while ago, email still dominates network traffic when you look at 
transactions; but video clearly eats of most of the bandwidth).

Regards,

Miles Fidelman




-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra



More information about the NANOG mailing list