On Jun 27, 2014, at 9:58 PM, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: > One of the points in the wired article that kicked this thread off was > this picture of what the internet is starting to look like: > > http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/net_neutral.jpg.jpeg > > I don't want it to look like that.
Well, I think trying to describe the Internet in those terms is a lot like half a dozen blind men describing an elephant. The picture makes a point, and a good one. But it’s also wildly inaccurate. It depends on which blind man you ask. And they’ll all be right, from their perspective. There is in fact a backbone. Once upon a time, it was run by a single company, BBN. Then it was more like five, and then ... and now it’s 169. There are, if the BGP report (http://seclists.org/nanog/2014/Jun/495) is to be believed, 47136 ASNs in the system, of which 35929 don’t show up as transit for anyone and are therefore presumably edge networks and potentially multihomed, and of those 16325 only announce a single prefix. Of the 6101 ASNs that show up as transit, 169 ONLY show up as transit. Yes, the core is 169 ASNs, and it’s not a little dot off to the side. If you want to know where it is, do a traceroute (tracery on windows). I’ll give you two, one through Cisco and one through my residential provider. traceroute to reed.com (67.223.249.82), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets 1 sjc-fred-881.cisco.com (10.19.64.113) 1.289 ms 12.000 ms 1.130 ms 2 sjce-access-hub1-tun10.cisco.com (10.27.128.1) 47.661 ms 45.281 ms 42.995 ms 3 ... 11 sjck-isp-gw1-ten1-1-0.cisco.com (128.107.239.217) 44.972 ms 45.094 ms 43.670 ms 12 tengige0-2-0-0.gw5.scl2.alter.net (152.179.99.153) 48.806 ms 49.338 ms 47.975 ms 13 0.xe-9-1-0.br1.sjc7.alter.net (152.63.51.101) 43.998 ms 45.595 ms 49.838 ms 14 206.111.6.121.ptr.us.xo.net (206.111.6.121) 52.110 ms 45.492 ms 47.373 ms 15 207.88.14.225.ptr.us.xo.net (207.88.14.225) 126.696 ms 124.374 ms 127.983 ms 16 te-2-0-0.rar3.washington-dc.us.xo.net (207.88.12.70) 127.639 ms 132.965 ms 131.415 ms 17 te-3-0-0.rar3.nyc-ny.us.xo.net (207.88.12.73) 129.747 ms 125.680 ms 123.907 ms 18 ae0d0.mcr1.cambridge-ma.us.xo.net (216.156.0.26) 125.009 ms 123.152 ms 126.992 ms 19 ip65-47-145-6.z145-47-65.customer.algx.net (65.47.145.6) 118.244 ms 118.024 ms 117.983 ms 20 * * * 21 209.59.211.175 (209.59.211.175) 119.378 ms * 122.057 ms 22 reed.com (67.223.249.82) 120.051 ms 120.146 ms 118.672 ms traceroute to reed.com (67.223.249.82), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets 1 10.0.2.1 (10.0.2.1) 1.728 ms 1.140 ms 1.289 ms 2 10.6.44.1 (10.6.44.1) 122.289 ms 126.330 ms 14.782 ms 3 ip68-4-12-20.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.12.20) 13.208 ms 12.667 ms 8.941 ms 4 ip68-4-11-96.oc.oc.cox.net (68.4.11.96) 17.025 ms 13.911 ms 13.835 ms 5 langbprj01-ae1.rd.la.cox.net (68.1.1.13) 131.855 ms 14.677 ms 129.860 ms 6 68.105.30.150 (68.105.30.150) 16.750 ms 31.627 ms 130.134 ms 7 ae11.cr2.lax112.us.above.net (64.125.21.173) 40.754 ms 31.873 ms 130.246 ms 8 ae3.cr2.iah1.us.above.net (64.125.21.85) 162.884 ms 77.157 ms 69.431 ms 9 ae14.cr2.dca2.us.above.net (64.125.21.53) 97.115 ms 113.428 ms 80.068 ms 10 ae8.mpr4.bos2.us.above.net.29.125.64.in-addr.arpa (64.125.29.33) 109.957 ms 124.964 ms 122.447 ms 11 * 64.125.69.90.t01470-01.above.net (64.125.69.90) 86.163 ms 103.232 ms 12 250.252.148.207.static.yourhostingaccount.com (207.148.252.250) 111.068 ms 119.984 ms 114.022 ms 13 209.59.211.175 (209.59.211.175) 103.358 ms 87.412 ms 86.345 ms 14 reed.com (67.223.249.82) 87.276 ms 102.752 ms 86.800 ms Cisco->AlterNet->XO->ALGX is one path, and Cox->AboveNet->Presumably ALGX is another. They both traverse the core. Going to bufferbloat.net, I actually do skip the core in one path. Through Cisco, I go through core site and hurricane electric and finally into ISC. ISC, it turns out, is a Cox customer; taking my residential path, since Cox serves us both, the traffic never goes upstream from Cox. Yes, there are CDNs. I don’t think you’d like the way Video/IP and especially adaptive bitrate video - Netflix, Youtube, etc - worked if they didn’t exist. Akamai is probably the prototypical one, and when they deployed theirs it made the Internet quite a bit snappier - and that helped the economics of Internet sales. Google and Facebook actually do operate large data centers, but a lot of their common content (or at least Google’s) is in CDNlets. NetFlix uses several CDNs, or so I’m told; the best explanation I have found of their issues with Comcast and Level 3 is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR1sLLOYxnY (and it has imperfections). And yes, part of the story is business issues over CDNs. Netflix’s data traverses the core once to each CDN download server, and from the server to its customers. The IETF uses a CDN, as of recently. It’s called Cloudflare. One of the places I worry is Chrome and Silk’s SPDY Proxies, which are somewhere in Google and Amazon respectively. Chrome and Silk send https and SPDY traffic directly to the targeted service, but http traffic to their proxies, which do their magic and send the result back. One of the potential implications is that instead of going to the CDN nearest me, it then goes to the CDN nearest the proxy. That’s not good for me. I just hope that the CDNs I use accept https from me, because that will give me the best service (and btw encrypts my data). Blind men and elephants, and they’re all right.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
