North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
- From: Owen DeLong
- Date: Sat Aug 22 15:09:37 1998
Fri, 21 Aug 1998, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > Sure, but only the assymetry that results from BBN customers ASKING for more
> > than they OFFER.
> Or is it the asymmetry that results from Exodus customers OFFERING more
> than they ASK FOR?
Since flow studies are confidential information, I will not quote from them.
However, I will say that I would think it intuitively obvious to almost anyone
on this list that Web Hosters don't OFFER very many packets that aren't a
response to a REQUEST. Now, if we were discussing a large content provider
that hosted alot of push-oriented sites, that might be a different story.
> I don't think one of these views has any claim to precedence over the
> other. Just because long distance phone calling introduced the purely
> artificial concept that the initiator of the transaction pays for it does
> not mean we should analyze IP traffic in the same way. In the past we have
> considered the initiator of IP transactions to be irrelevant and had
> no-charge peering for networks that basically send a similar number of
> bytes to what they receive.
Ah, but with the advent of providers that focus primarily on access and other
providers that focus primarily on hosting, the similar number of octets concept
is disappearing. Not because one side is changing the balance, but because
both sides are changing. More and more of the access providers are becoming
larger and larger sinks at the same time that the hosting providers are
becoming larger and larger sources. The shifting of the traffic flows is
changing at roughly the same rate on BOTH sides, not because of one sides
Also, long distance phone calling didn't introduce the concept, it was around
prior to telephones. Look at how shipping was handled on catalog orders in
days before telephones. Generally, the purchaser pays shipping in almost all
commerce. This has been true for a very long time.
> So what do we do when that is no longer the case?
I _REALLY_ don't see that much of a need for changing the way things are.
If the access providers cannot deliver the packets their customers request
from the point they say they want to receive said traffic to their customers
for the price they are charging said customers, then they need to reevaluate
their pricing model. Similarly, it is the responsibility (IMHO) of the
content provider to deliver the packets to the requested handoff point.