Re: Cost effective time servers

[Andy Ringsmuth]

> On Jun 20, 2019, at 10:18 PM, Jay Hennigan  wrote:
> 
> On 6/20/19 07:39, David Bass wrote:
>> What are folks using these days for smaller organizations, that need to dole 
>> out time from an internal source?
> 
> If you want to go really cheap and don't value your time, but do value 
> knowing the correct time, a GPS receiver with a USB interface and a Raspberry 
> Pi would do the trick.

Not sure how accurate you need, but I just use a Raspberry Pi as a pool.ntp.org 
node. I thought about going the GPS route with it but didn’t want to mess with 
it.


-Andy

Re: Cost effective time servers

[Jay Hennigan]

On 6/20/19 07:39, David Bass wrote:
What are folks using these days for smaller organizations, that need to 
dole out time from an internal source?


If you want to go really cheap and don't value your time, but do value 
knowing the correct time, a GPS receiver with a USB interface and a 
Raspberry Pi would do the trick.


--
Jay Hennigan - j...@west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Ross Tajvar]

I think that was a BitTorrent reference.

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 8:17 PM Valdis Klētnieks 
wrote:

> On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 10:16:03 -0600, "Keith Medcalf" said:
> > Having an inbound:outbound ration of 10:1 is known as a leech ...
>
> Just remember that without "leech" networks like Comcast, everybody who's
> selling transit to content providers would be having a hard sell
> indeed.
>
>

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Valdis Klētnieks]

On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 10:16:03 -0600, "Keith Medcalf" said:
> Having an inbound:outbound ration of 10:1 is known as a leech ...

Just remember that without "leech" networks like Comcast, everybody who's
selling transit to content providers would be having a hard sell indeed.



pgpkFBQ_vWGng.pgp
Description: PGP signature

RE: BGP person from Bell Canada/AS577

[Aaron Gould]

As I recall, yes that is true.

Somethings mentioned here...

https://www.akamai.com/us/en/multimedia/documents/akamai/akamai-accelerated-network-partner-aanp-faq.pdf

I recall that after I deployed my local AANP clusters, that *if* I wanted to 
bypass local aanp caching, that I would change my dns setting and thus bypass 
aanp cache, and flow out to inet.

-Aaron

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Hi Keith,
Honestly? I don’t! I have never worked with an ISP or similar. If I ever get 
the chance, that would be exciting. Until then, I think this platform is one of 
the best places where I can get the answer from the people who has first-hand 
experience in this field.
Your classification is also interesting. I’d love to know if this is how people 
classify their networks.
Thanks for sharing your observations.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/

> On Jun 20, 2019, at 12:21 PM, Keith Medcalf  wrote:
> 
> 
> Why would you think that "Heavy Inbound" signifies a greater inbound:oubound 
> ratio compared to "Mostly Inbound"?
> 
> To me "Heavy Inbound" means that there is more inbound than outbound and 
> "Mostly Inbound" means exactly that -- mostly/usually/exclusively inbound 
> with the occasional outbound byte or two.
> 
> ---
> The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a 
> lot about anticipated traffic volume.
> 
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Prasun Dey
>> Sent: Wednesday, 19 June, 2019 15:33
>> To: Mike Hammett
>> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
>> 
>> Thank you, Mike.
>> From an outsider, I don’t have any information of an ISP’s traffic
>> numbers. And this may be confidential unless we are using any
>> measurement platform, which CAIDA is doing. To get a rough idea about
>> any ISP’s traffic outbound:inbound ratio I can only see it's
>> PeeringDB label. But, the question is whether there is any community
>> decided values against these labels?
>> Like,
>> 1:2 = Balanced
>> 1:5 = Mostly Inbound
>> 1:10 = Heavy Inbound
>> 10:1 = Heavy Outbound
>> I just came up with these values. They don’t mean anything. I don’t
>> have any solid evidence or source to support them. So, my question
>> is, what people actually use? Or, it totally depends on the ISPs and
>> they vary.
>> 
>> -
>> Prasun
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Prasun Kanti Dey
>> Ph.D. Candidate,
>> Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
>> University of Central Florida
>> web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>On Jun 19, 2019, at 5:18 PM, Mike Hammett 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>Yes, you seem to misunderstand (at least of what I understand).
>> PeeringDB has categories of ratios to choose from. What has the
>> community decided is acceptable ratios for each category? It's fairly
>> trivial for any network to determine what their ratio is as a number,
>> but not necessarily as a PeeringDB label.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>-
>>Mike Hammett
>>Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>Midwest Internet Exchange 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>The Brothers WISP 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>From: "Josh Luthman" 
>>To: "Prasun Dey" 
>>Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>>Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:23:33 PM
>>Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
>> 
>> 
>>>my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to
>> claim itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)
>> 
>>Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the
>> interface graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a
>> little little blue line for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential
>> and commercial customers.
>> 
>> 
>>Josh Luthman
>>Office: 937-552-2340
>>Direct: 937-552-2343
>>1100 Wayne St
>>Suite 1337
>>Troy, OH 45373
>> 
>> 
>>On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>Hi Martijn and Josh,
>>Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my
>> requirement so that you may help me better.
>>According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint
>> (Transit), Amazon (Content) all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While,
>> Cable One, an Access ISP says it is Heavy Inbound, while Akamai,
>> Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the other hand, Cox, another
>> access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
>>So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP
>> decides to claim itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or
>> Balanced)? From an ISP’s own point of view, at what point, it says,
>> my outbound:inbound is something, so I’m Heavy Outbound.
>>Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this 

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Thanks Valdis for clarifying this. Based on this thread discussion, I’m getting 
this understanding as well. 

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/

> On Jun 20, 2019, at 10:28 AM, Valdis Klētnieks  
> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 16:20:37 -0400, Prasun Dey said:
>> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim
>> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s 
>> own
>> point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, so 
>> I’m
>> Heavy Outbound.
> 
> Often, just "We're eyeballs, so heavily inbound" or similar quick estimation
> with no real numbers attached.  Otherwise, often whatever the ISP's management
> thinks will give the best results when trying to convince another network to
> peer rather than have to pay for transit, or other similar reasons often only
> vaguely connected to reality.
> 

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Hi Job,
While doing some study, I recently came across this 
https://drpeering.net/white-papers/The-Folly-Of-Peering-Ratios.html
This discussion was from from a Nanog meeting that took place a long time ago. 
This made me interested to know whether there is some actual numbers behind 
those PeeringDB traffic ratio labels. 
I think your comment on the importance of traffic ratio for a specific ASN 
pairing is spot on. Those information are confidential, and rightly to be so. 
All I wanted to know how much traffic a provider handles (receives vs. 
delivers), regardless of its business type. As other members have also 
mentioned, general consensus is, CPs are outbound, while transits are Balanced. 
I was wondering if there is some publicly available information about this 
labels. But, seems like these are more like generic information and their 
impact is very small in real life while ISPs decide to peer.
Thank you for your response.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/

> On Jun 20, 2019, at 10:27 AM, Job Snijders  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 4:21 PM Steller, Anthony J
>  wrote:
>> because it really don’t matter in the whole scheme of things.
> 
> Indeed, it doesn't matter. The "traffic ratio" field in PeeringDB
> probably should be deprecated, there is no formal definition nor is
> are there any operational consequences to changing the contents of
> that field. The contents of the field are entirely arbitrary.
> 
> If the traffic ratio is relevant (I am not saying it is or isn't),
> such traffic ratios probably should be viewed in exclusively in
> context of specific ASN pairings. Maybe between you and me we'll see
> the dominant traffic direction being one way, and with another ASN
> pairing we see the opposite. There is no telling other than through
> observation, any such observations are unlikely to be shared with the
> general public.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Job

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Dear Mike,
Regardless of very few direct answers, I found this discussion very 
interesting. I think one possible reason for not having any specific numbers, 
as some members have already pointed out, is there doesn’t exist any. As an 
outsider, with zero hands-on experience in ISP field apart from studying, my 
understanding is, ISPs just visualize their own traffic using monitoring tools 
and label themselves. I wish there were any literature on this topic. I’d love 
to read that.
Thank you for your reply.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/

> On Jun 20, 2019, at 10:16 AM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
> 
> The problem you're running into, Prasun, is that people either aren't 
> actually reading what you're saying or have poor comprehension skills. Very 
> few people are directly addressing what you're asking.
> 
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> 
> The Brothers WISP
> 
> From: "Prasun Dey" 
> To: "Josh Luthman" 
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:42:38 PM
> Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
> 
> Josh, 
> That’s great. I’m assuming your traffic is mainly inbound. So, my question 
> is, do you have a threshold that defines your traffic ratio type.
> I’m taking an example from this thread. Say, your average incoming traffic is 
> ~45 gbps, and outgoing traffic is ~4.5 gbps. So, your outbound:inbound = 
> 1:10. What are you? Heavy Inbound?
> Extending this example, if your ratio is 1:7 or 1:6, then, what would you 
> claim to be? A ‘Mostly Inbound’? Or still call yourself as Heavy Inbound? I’m 
> just trying to understand what is the community practice?
> Thank you. 
> 
> -
> Prasun
> 
> Regards,
> Prasun Kanti Dey
> Ph.D. Candidate,
> Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida
> web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 19, 2019, at 4:23 PM, Josh Luthman  wrote:
> 
> >my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
> >as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the interface 
> graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a little little blue 
> line for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential and commercial customers.
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey  wrote:
>> Hi Martijn and Josh,
>> Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my requirement so 
>> that you may help me better.
>> According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
>> all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
>> Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the 
>> other hand, Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
>> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim 
>> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s 
>> own point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, 
>> so I’m Heavy Outbound. 
>> Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done 
>> a better job in formulating my question earlier.
>> Thank you.
>> 
>> -
>> Prasun
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Prasun Kanti Dey
>> Ph.D. Candidate,
>> Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
>> University of Central Florida
>> web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net - Martijn Schmidt 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> It kinda depends on the application that's being used. For example, 
>> videogaming has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5 since you're only 
>> transmitting metadata about the players environment across the wire. The 
>> actual video is typically rendered at the end user's side. So it's not very 
>> bandwidth heavy. 
>> 
>> Compare that with a videostream (watching a movie or TV series) and you're 
>> pumping the rendered video across the wire, so there's a very different 
>> ratio. Your return path traffic would pretty much consist of control stuff 
>> only (like pushing the pause button).
>> 
>> Some networks are dedicated to serving one type of content, whereas others 
>> might have a blend of different kinds of content. Same story for an access 
>> network geared to business users which want to use emails and such, vs 
>> residential end users looking for the evening's entertainment.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Martijn 
>> 
>>> On 19 June 2019 19:54:45 CEST, Josh Luthman  
>>> wrote:
>>> If you're asking an ISP, consumers will always be inbound.  It's the end 
>>> user.  The outbound would be where the information is coming from, like 
>>> data centers.
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure you're 

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Thanks Valdis for mentioning the classifications. I’ve used ISPs as generic 
word. But, you’re right, it’d be better if I had distinguished the CPs, ISPs or 
the Transits specifically. However, thanks to the community, they’ve understood 
and provided me some really helpful answers. 

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/

> On Jun 19, 2019, at 10:10 PM, Valdis Klētnieks  
> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 11:05:40 -0400, Prasun Dey said:
> 
>> I’ve seen from PeeringDB that every ISP reveals its traffic ratio as Heavy/
>> Mostly Inbound or Balanced or Heavy/ Mostly Outbound.
>> I’m wondering if there is any specific ratio numbers for them
> 
> If they're an ISP that sells to end user consumers, they're going to be a 
> heavy
> eyeball traffic - all the big packets are coming inbound from content 
> providers and
> going to consumers.
> 
> Content providers will of course show lots of big packets heading outwards 
> toward
> eyeball networks - but those usually aren't called ISPs.
> 
> If they're selling mostly transit, then they're more likely to be balanced, 
> but
> again, then they're probably not really an "ISP" as the word is usually used.
> 

RE: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Keith Medcalf]

Why would you think that "Heavy Inbound" signifies a greater inbound:oubound 
ratio compared to "Mostly Inbound"?

To me "Heavy Inbound" means that there is more inbound than outbound and 
"Mostly Inbound" means exactly that -- mostly/usually/exclusively inbound with 
the occasional outbound byte or two.

---
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a 
lot about anticipated traffic volume.


>-Original Message-
>From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Prasun Dey
>Sent: Wednesday, 19 June, 2019 15:33
>To: Mike Hammett
>Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
>
>Thank you, Mike.
>From an outsider, I don’t have any information of an ISP’s traffic
>numbers. And this may be confidential unless we are using any
>measurement platform, which CAIDA is doing. To get a rough idea about
>any ISP’s traffic outbound:inbound ratio I can only see it's
>PeeringDB label. But, the question is whether there is any community
>decided values against these labels?
>Like,
>1:2 = Balanced
>1:5 = Mostly Inbound
>1:10 = Heavy Inbound
>10:1 = Heavy Outbound
>I just came up with these values. They don’t mean anything. I don’t
>have any solid evidence or source to support them. So, my question
>is, what people actually use? Or, it totally depends on the ISPs and
>they vary.
>
>-
>Prasun
>
>Regards,
>Prasun Kanti Dey
>Ph.D. Candidate,
>Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
>University of Central Florida
>web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   On Jun 19, 2019, at 5:18 PM, Mike Hammett 
>wrote:
>
>   Yes, you seem to misunderstand (at least of what I understand).
>PeeringDB has categories of ratios to choose from. What has the
>community decided is acceptable ratios for each category? It's fairly
>trivial for any network to determine what their ratio is as a number,
>but not necessarily as a PeeringDB label.
>
>
>
>
>   -
>   Mike Hammett
>   Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>
>
>
>
>   Midwest Internet Exchange 
>
>
>
>   The Brothers WISP 
>
>
>
>
>
>   From: "Josh Luthman" 
>   To: "Prasun Dey" 
>   Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>   Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:23:33 PM
>   Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
>
>
>   >my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to
>claim itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)
>
>   Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the
>interface graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a
>little little blue line for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential
>and commercial customers.
>
>
>   Josh Luthman
>   Office: 937-552-2340
>   Direct: 937-552-2343
>   1100 Wayne St
>   Suite 1337
>   Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>   On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey
> wrote:
>
>
>   Hi Martijn and Josh,
>   Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my
>requirement so that you may help me better.
>   According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint
>(Transit), Amazon (Content) all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While,
>Cable One, an Access ISP says it is Heavy Inbound, while Akamai,
>Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the other hand, Cox, another
>access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
>   So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP
>decides to claim itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or
>Balanced)? From an ISP’s own point of view, at what point, it says,
>my outbound:inbound is something, so I’m Heavy Outbound.
>   Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry
>I should’ve done a better job in formulating my question earlier.
>   Thank you.
>
>
>   -
>   Prasun
>
>   Regards,
>   Prasun Kanti Dey
>   Ph.D. Candidate,
>   Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
>   University of Central Florida
>   web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net
>  - Martijn Schmidt  wrote:
>
>   It kinda depends on the application that's being
>used. For example, videogaming has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5
>since you're only transmitting metadata about the players environment
>across 

RE: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Keith Medcalf]

Having an inbound:outbound ration of 10:1 is known as a leech ...

---
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a 
lot about anticipated traffic volume.

>-Original Message-
>From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Prasun Dey
>Sent: Wednesday, 19 June, 2019 14:58
>To: Aaron Gould
>Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
>
>Thank you Aaron,
>This is great. This gives an interesting insight regarding CDN as
>they seem to play a big role here. However, in general, what do you
>call your ISP as? A 'Heavy Inbound' or 'Mostly Inbound'? Is there any
>community standard about this ratio (having 1:10 or higher) to be
>treated as Heavy Inbound? Or this is just a rough estimation?
>
>Thank you.
>-
>Prasun
>
>Regards,
>Prasun Kanti Dey
>Ph.D. Candidate,
>Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
>University of Central Florida
>web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:18 PM, Aaron Gould 
>wrote:
>
>   I run an eyeballs/isp network for about ~50,000 subscribers, and
>I see about 1:10 ratio at peak time.  Last night ~4.5 gbps out, ~45
>gbps in.  But, I do have local caching of 4 big name cdn cache
>providers, so that might alter the 1:10 ratio I see on my actual inet
>links (which do not include the local cdn traffic)
>
>   …take Netflix for instance… I see on my local nfx cdn links,
>1:100 ratio of in:out.  20 gbps inbound and .2 gbps outbound  (during
>that same timeframe as aforementioned actual inet links)
>
>   Numbers based on 21:00 CDT last night.
>
>
>   -Aaron
>

Re: Cost effective time servers

[Warren Kumari]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 11:42 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:
>
> Warren,
>
> I like the cheap price of the LeoNTP. The only reason I prefer the Tm1000a is 
> that it has an embedded web server, which lets me monitor the satellite 
> constellation visibility. Otherwise, except for oven-controller time clocks, 
> it seems obvious that the $2000+ GPS NTP servers are overpriced overkill :)

Yup, that is a very good point -- the LeoNTP has a small LED interface
and a rotary encoder for configuration and monitoring, but it doesn't
have a web UI.
>From the FAQ:
"Q/ Can I configure it via HTTP/Telnet ?
A/ No. Running a web server on this device although entirely possible
would reduce the performance of the unit. Therefore we took the
decision to just do configuration via the front panel."

This is indeed a really annoying limitation - in the past I've ended
up pointing a webcam at the LCD, but that is (obviously) suboptimal.
I also forgot to mention that it doesn't (yet) do v6, but that might
be added in future firmware versions...

W



>
> -mel via cell
>
> > On Jun 20, 2019, at 8:31 AM, Warren Kumari  wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 11:00 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:
> >>
> >> I use the $300 GPS-based TM1000A from TimeMachinesCorp.com. Gets Stratum-1 
> >> time from GPS satellites and distributes it. Usually I relay this through 
> >> a handful of local time servers to spread out the load, but it can handle 
> >> hundreds of queries per minute, so it’s reasonable to use as a primary 
> >> source even in moderate-sized data centers.
> >>
> >> I’ve put in a ton of them, and in most installations I buy two for 
> >> redundancy. The GPS antenna works from a window in most instances .
> >
> > I recently fell down the high precision time rabbithole, and now have
> > 3 GPS units (a Truetime, a Symmetricom S250 and a LeoNTP), 3 Cesuim
> > Primary Reference sources (an FTS4060, and 2 PRS-50s), and an
> > assortment rubidium units.
> >
> > One of the "standard" solutions is one of the Microsemi (Symmetricom)
> > SyncServer's, but these can be expensive -- I've been much happies
> > with the LeoNTP (
> > http://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info_id=272
> > ) -- they are small, they are cheap, and they fast, they are "accurate
> > enough", and they just work. I've got one on my desk, with a cheap
> > (car) GPS antenna dangling out the window, and it syncs and runs
> > happily. A friend of mine has stuffed one in an IP68 box and it's
> > hanging happily on the side of a TV tower in the elements with no
> > issues...
> >
> > I get mine from airspy.us - $349 + antenna.
> >
> > W
> >
> >
> >>
> >> -mel beckman
> >>
> >>> On Jun 20, 2019, at 7:53 AM, David Bass  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> What are folks using these days for smaller organizations, that need to 
> >>> dole out time from an internal source?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
> > idea in the first place.
> > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
> > of pants.
> >   ---maf



-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

Re: Cost effective time servers

[Mel Beckman]

Warren,

I like the cheap price of the LeoNTP. The only reason I prefer the Tm1000a is 
that it has an embedded web server, which lets me monitor the satellite 
constellation visibility. Otherwise, except for oven-controller time clocks, it 
seems obvious that the $2000+ GPS NTP servers are overpriced overkill :)

-mel via cell

> On Jun 20, 2019, at 8:31 AM, Warren Kumari  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 11:00 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:
>> 
>> I use the $300 GPS-based TM1000A from TimeMachinesCorp.com. Gets Stratum-1 
>> time from GPS satellites and distributes it. Usually I relay this through a 
>> handful of local time servers to spread out the load, but it can handle 
>> hundreds of queries per minute, so it’s reasonable to use as a primary 
>> source even in moderate-sized data centers.
>> 
>> I’ve put in a ton of them, and in most installations I buy two for 
>> redundancy. The GPS antenna works from a window in most instances .
> 
> I recently fell down the high precision time rabbithole, and now have
> 3 GPS units (a Truetime, a Symmetricom S250 and a LeoNTP), 3 Cesuim
> Primary Reference sources (an FTS4060, and 2 PRS-50s), and an
> assortment rubidium units.
> 
> One of the "standard" solutions is one of the Microsemi (Symmetricom)
> SyncServer's, but these can be expensive -- I've been much happies
> with the LeoNTP (
> http://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info_id=272
> ) -- they are small, they are cheap, and they fast, they are "accurate
> enough", and they just work. I've got one on my desk, with a cheap
> (car) GPS antenna dangling out the window, and it syncs and runs
> happily. A friend of mine has stuffed one in an IP68 box and it's
> hanging happily on the side of a TV tower in the elements with no
> issues...
> 
> I get mine from airspy.us - $349 + antenna.
> 
> W
> 
> 
>> 
>> -mel beckman
>> 
>>> On Jun 20, 2019, at 7:53 AM, David Bass  wrote:
>>> 
>>> What are folks using these days for smaller organizations, that need to 
>>> dole out time from an internal source?
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
> idea in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
> of pants.
>   ---maf

Re: Cost effective time servers

[Warren Kumari]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 11:00 AM Mel Beckman  wrote:
>
> I use the $300 GPS-based TM1000A from TimeMachinesCorp.com. Gets Stratum-1 
> time from GPS satellites and distributes it. Usually I relay this through a 
> handful of local time servers to spread out the load, but it can handle 
> hundreds of queries per minute, so it’s reasonable to use as a primary source 
> even in moderate-sized data centers.
>
> I’ve put in a ton of them, and in most installations I buy two for 
> redundancy. The GPS antenna works from a window in most instances .

I recently fell down the high precision time rabbithole, and now have
3 GPS units (a Truetime, a Symmetricom S250 and a LeoNTP), 3 Cesuim
Primary Reference sources (an FTS4060, and 2 PRS-50s), and an
assortment rubidium units.

One of the "standard" solutions is one of the Microsemi (Symmetricom)
SyncServer's, but these can be expensive -- I've been much happies
with the LeoNTP (
http://www.leobodnar.com/shop/index.php?main_page=product_info_id=272
) -- they are small, they are cheap, and they fast, they are "accurate
enough", and they just work. I've got one on my desk, with a cheap
(car) GPS antenna dangling out the window, and it syncs and runs
happily. A friend of mine has stuffed one in an IP68 box and it's
hanging happily on the side of a TV tower in the elements with no
issues...

I get mine from airspy.us - $349 + antenna.

W


>
>  -mel beckman
>
> > On Jun 20, 2019, at 7:53 AM, David Bass  wrote:
> >
> > What are folks using these days for smaller organizations, that need to 
> > dole out time from an internal source?



-- 
I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.
   ---maf

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Mark Tinka]

On 20/Jun/19 16:46, Seth Mattinen wrote:

>  
>
> A good question would be, who actually cares about ratios in the year
> 2019? Does anyone still calculate them and use them to decide
> anything? If so, why does it matter?

We never have.

I find the exercise pointless. In fact, more than 90% of the time that I
have come across the ratio discussion has not been from engineers, but
rather, sales people that think they know a lot more about peering than
peering co-ordinators.

A large ISP somewhere between France and Poland comes to memory...

Mark.

AT Email RBL POC Request

[Aaron Rabinowitz]

Can someone who manages RBL1  contact me off-list?



Thank you in advance!




--

Aaron

Re: Cost effective time servers

[Mel Beckman]

I use the $300 GPS-based TM1000A from TimeMachinesCorp.com. Gets Stratum-1 time 
from GPS satellites and distributes it. Usually I relay this through a handful 
of local time servers to spread out the load, but it can handle hundreds of 
queries per minute, so it’s reasonable to use as a primary source even in 
moderate-sized data centers.

I’ve put in a ton of them, and in most installations I buy two for redundancy. 
The GPS antenna works from a window in most instances .

 -mel beckman

> On Jun 20, 2019, at 7:53 AM, David Bass  wrote:
> 
> What are folks using these days for smaller organizations, that need to dole 
> out time from an internal source?

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Seth Mattinen]

On 6/20/19 7:16 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
The problem you're running into, Prasun, is that people either aren't 
actually reading what you're saying or have poor comprehension skills. 
Very few people are directly addressing what you're asking.



A good question would be, who actually cares about ratios in the year 
2019? Does anyone still calculate them and use them to decide anything? 
If so, why does it matter?

Cost effective time servers

[David Bass]

What are folks using these days for smaller organizations, that need to
dole out time from an internal source?

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Mark Tinka]

On 19/Jun/19 23:30, Steller, Anthony J wrote:

>  
>
> TL;DR - There are no hard numbers to give you, it just depends how
> someone feels that day of the week when setting it.
>

Not surprising if some use it as a way to separate peers that have the
stamina from those that don't :-).

For those that have the stamina, another process awaits them :-)...

Mark.

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Valdis Klētnieks]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 16:20:37 -0400, Prasun Dey said:
> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim
> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s 
> own
> point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, so 
> I’m
> Heavy Outbound.

Often, just "We're eyeballs, so heavily inbound" or similar quick estimation
with no real numbers attached.  Otherwise, often whatever the ISP's management
thinks will give the best results when trying to convince another network to
peer rather than have to pay for transit, or other similar reasons often only
vaguely connected to reality.



pgp8h5ibG6iTA.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Job Snijders]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 4:21 PM Steller, Anthony J
 wrote:
> because it really don’t matter in the whole scheme of things.

Indeed, it doesn't matter. The "traffic ratio" field in PeeringDB
probably should be deprecated, there is no formal definition nor is
are there any operational consequences to changing the contents of
that field. The contents of the field are entirely arbitrary.

If the traffic ratio is relevant (I am not saying it is or isn't),
such traffic ratios probably should be viewed in exclusively in
context of specific ASN pairings. Maybe between you and me we'll see
the dominant traffic direction being one way, and with another ASN
pairing we see the opposite. There is no telling other than through
observation, any such observations are unlikely to be shared with the
general public.

Kind regards,

Job

Re: few big monolithic PEs vs many small PEs

[Mark Tinka]

On 19/Jun/19 22:22, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:

> Yes it will cost a bit more (router is more expensive than a LC)

I found the reverse to be true... chassis' are cheap. Line cards are costly.


>  
> Would like to hear what are your thoughts on this conundrum.

So this depends on where you want to deliver your service, and the
function, in my opinion.

If you are talking about an IP/MPLS-enabled Metro-E network, then having
several, smaller routers spread across one or more rings is cheaper and
more effective.

If you are delivering services to large customers from within a data
centre, large edge routers make more sense, particularly given the
rising costs of co-location.

If you are providing BNG services, it depends on how you want to balance
ease of management vs. scale vs. cost. If you have the cash to spend,
de-centralizing your BNG's across a region/city/country will give you
more scale and better redundancy, but could be more costly depending on
your per-box sizing as well as an increase in management time. If you
want to improve management, you can have fewer boxes to cover large
parts of your region/city/country. But this may mean buying a very large
box to concentrate more users in fewer places.

If you are trying to combine Enterprise, Service Provider and Consumer
services in one chassis, well, as the saying goes, "If you are
competitor, I approve of this message" :-).

Mark.

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Mike Hammett]

The problem you're running into, Prasun, is that people either aren't actually 
reading what you're saying or have poor comprehension skills. Very few people 
are directly addressing what you're asking. 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "Prasun Dey"  
To: "Josh Luthman"  
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:42:38 PM 
Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP 

Josh, 
That’s great. I’m assuming your traffic is mainly inbound. So, my question is, 
do you have a threshold that defines your traffic ratio type. 
I’m taking an example from this thread. Say, your average incoming traffic is 
~45 gbps, and outgoing traffic is ~4.5 gbps. So, your outbound:inbound = 1:10. 
What are you? Heavy Inbound? 
Extending this example, if your ratio is 1:7 or 1:6, then, what would you claim 
to be? A ‘Mostly Inbound’? Or still call yourself as Heavy Inbound? I’m just 
trying to understand what is the community practice? 
Thank you. 


- 
Prasun 







Regards, 
Prasun Kanti Dey 
Ph.D. Candidate, 
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 
University of Central Florida 
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/ 









On Jun 19, 2019, at 4:23 PM, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 


>my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself as 
>any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced) 


Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the interface 
graphs. We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a little little blue line 
for outbound. We are an ISP with residential and commercial customers. 





Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 



On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey < pra...@nevada.unr.edu > wrote: 




Hi Martijn and Josh, Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my 
requirement so that you may help me better. 
According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the other 
hand, Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound. 
So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s own point 
of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, so I’m Heavy 
Outbound. 
Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done a 
better job in formulating my question earlier. 
Thank you. 



- 
Prasun 







Regards, 
Prasun Kanti Dey 
Ph.D. Candidate, 
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 
University of Central Florida 
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/ 









On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net - Martijn Schmidt < martijnschm...@i3d.net 
> wrote: 


It kinda depends on the application that's being used. For example, videogaming 
has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5 since you're only transmitting metadata 
about the players environment across the wire. The actual video is typically 
rendered at the end user's side. So it's not very bandwidth heavy. 

Compare that with a videostream (watching a movie or TV series) and you're 
pumping the rendered video across the wire, so there's a very different ratio. 
Your return path traffic would pretty much consist of control stuff only (like 
pushing the pause button). 

Some networks are dedicated to serving one type of content, whereas others 
might have a blend of different kinds of content. Same story for an access 
network geared to business users which want to use emails and such, vs 
residential end users looking for the evening's entertainment. 

Best regards, 
Martijn 


On 19 June 2019 19:54:45 CEST, Josh Luthman < j...@imaginenetworksllc.com > 
wrote: 


If you're asking an ISP, consumers will always be inbound. It's the end user. 
The outbound would be where the information is coming from, like data centers. 






I'm not sure you're going to get any better answer without a more specific 
question. 

Josh Luthman 
Office: 937-552-2340 
Direct: 937-552-2343 
1100 Wayne St 
Suite 1337 
Troy, OH 45373 



On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:50 PM Prasun Dey < pra...@nevada.unr.edu > wrote: 


Hello, 
Good morning. 
I’m a Ph.D. candidate from University of Central Florida. I have a query, I 
hope you can help me with it or at least point me to the right direction. 
I’ve seen from PeeringDB that every ISP reveals its traffic ratio as Heavy/ 
Mostly Inbound or Balanced or Heavy/ Mostly Outbound. 
I’m wondering if there is any specific ratio numbers for them. In Norton’s 
Internet Peering Playbook or some other literary work, they mention the 
outbound:inbound traffic ratio as 1:1.2 to up to 1:3 for Balanced. But, I 
couldn’t find the other values. 
I’d really 

Re: BGP person from Bell Canada/AS577

[Bjoern Franke]

> clusters so it's not really up to Bell to go against Akamai's request 
> to send their own + customer prefixes for their cluster.
> 

Does Akamai mostly rely on the DNS the request was coming from?

Regards
Bjoern

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

You’re right on that, Baldur. I’m aware of this, but my focus is to know 
whether there are any exact numbers that community has agreed on.
Thank you for your reply.

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/



> On Jun 19, 2019, at 6:59 PM, Baldur Norddahl  
> wrote:
> 
> Pure ISP is heavy inbound. Pure hosting is heavy outbound. 
> 
> The other categories are for people that have both types of business or who 
> sell transit to both types of business. You are being asked what kind you are 
> most. 
> 
> Regards 
> 
> Baldur 
> 
> 
> ons. 19. jun. 2019 18.50 skrev Prasun Dey  >:
> Hello,
> Good morning.
> I’m a Ph.D. candidate from University of Central Florida. I have a query, I 
> hope you can help me with it or at least point me to the right direction.
> I’ve seen from PeeringDB that every ISP reveals its traffic ratio as Heavy/ 
> Mostly Inbound or Balanced or Heavy/ Mostly Outbound. 
> I’m wondering if there is any specific ratio numbers for them. In Norton’s 
> Internet Peering Playbook or some other literary work, they mention the 
> outbound:inbound traffic ratio as 1:1.2 to up to 1:3 for Balanced. But, I 
> couldn’t find the other values.
> I’d really appreciate your help if you can please mention what 
> Outbound:Inbound ratios that network admins use frequently to represent their 
> traffic ratios for 
> 1. Heavy Inbound:
> 2. Mostly Inbound:
> 3. Mostly Outbound:
> 4. Heavy Outbound:
> 
> Thank you.
> -
> Prasun
> -- 
> Sincerely,
> Prasun Kanti Dey,
> Ph.D. candidate,
> Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida.

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Thank you Steller, 
Your response is extremely helpful. I really appreciate your detailed 
explanation. 
While I was looking for these numbers, I couldn’t find any. I thought, as an 
outsider, these numbers may not be accessible for me. And, as I don’t own an 
AS, so, I can’t be a member of PeeringDB! Instead I thought, why don’t I ask 
for your help directly to get a proper guidance. And, this discussion certainly 
helped me. Thank you again.
On a separate note, I’m happy that my mail drew your attention to update in the 
PeeringDB. Don’t know if it matters at all!

-
Prasun 

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






> On Jun 19, 2019, at 5:30 PM, Steller, Anthony J  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Prasun,
>  
> It was updated because ‘Balanced’ wasn’t accurate, we didn’t notice that’s 
> what it said until you pointed it out, because it really don’t matter in the 
> whole scheme of things. In regards to:
>  
> >> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim 
> >> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an 
> >> ISP’s own point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is 
> >> something, so I’m Heavy Outbound. 
>  
> As a residential ISP, we are an eyeball network, we connect to the people 
> using the content on the internet (of course with commercial customers also 
> who host content, but mainly residential). Because of the nature of the users 
> on our network, we are considered Heavy Inbound since most traffic will be 
> going from content providers to users on our network. It’s really as simple 
> as that, we do no calculation to figure out our traffic ratio and update 
> according to some arbitrary ratio number, because none of that matters. That 
> field in PeeringDB is used as additional information for someone who may look 
> at the ASN and try to determine what to expect in general if connecting to 
> them.
>  
> TL;DR - There are no hard numbers to give you, it just depends how someone 
> feels that day of the week when setting it.
>  
> Hope this helps.
>  
>  
> From: Prasun Dey [mailto:pra...@nevada.unr.edu] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 4:08 PM
> To: Knopps, Brian; Peering
> Cc: Josh Luthman; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
>  
> Seems you just have updated today. Thanks for letting us know. 
> Last time, I checked was yesterday and based on that I mentioned your traffic 
> ratio being ‘Balanced’. 
>  
> Regards,
> Prasun Kanti Dey
> Ph.D. Candidate,
> Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida
> web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/ 
> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 19, 2019, at 4:57 PM, Knopps, Brian  > wrote:
>  
> 
>  
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org ] 
> On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:24 PM
> To: Prasun Dey
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
> Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
>  
> >my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
> >as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)
>  
> Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the interface 
> graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a little little blue 
> line for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential and commercial customers.
>  
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>  
>  
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey  > wrote:
> Hi Martijn and Josh,
> Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my requirement so 
> that you may help me better.
> According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
> all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
> Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the 
> other hand,  Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim 
> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s 
> own point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, 
> so I’m Heavy Outbound. 
> Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done a 
> better job in formulating my question earlier.
> Thank you.
>  
> -
> Prasun
>  
> Regards,
> Prasun Kanti Dey
> Ph.D. Candidate,
> Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida
> web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/ 
> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net  - Martijn Schmidt 
> mailto:martijnschm...@i3d.net>> 

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Thank you Aaron for confirming that. This is helpful.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






> On Jun 19, 2019, at 5:26 PM, Aaron Gould  wrote:
> 
> I’m heavy inbound.  Which I think is characteristic of a stub-AS with lots of 
> resi/busi bb ... no transit… just a lot of people looking at stuff.
>  
> Inbound is of course from the perspective of traffic coming into my AS
>  
> -Aaron

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Thank you, Mike.
From an outsider, I don’t have any information of an ISP’s traffic numbers. And 
this may be confidential unless we are using any measurement platform, which 
CAIDA is doing. To get a rough idea about any ISP’s traffic outbound:inbound 
ratio I can only see it's PeeringDB label. But, the question is whether there 
is any community decided values against these labels? 
Like, 
1:2 = Balanced
1:5 = Mostly Inbound
1:10 = Heavy Inbound
10:1 = Heavy Outbound
I just came up with these values. They don’t mean anything. I don’t have any 
solid evidence or source to support them. So, my question is, what people 
actually use? Or, it totally depends on the ISPs and they vary.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






> On Jun 19, 2019, at 5:18 PM, Mike Hammett  wrote:
> 
> Yes, you seem to misunderstand (at least of what I understand). PeeringDB has 
> categories of ratios to choose from. What has the community decided is 
> acceptable ratios for each category? It's fairly trivial for any network to 
> determine what their ratio is as a number, but not necessarily as a PeeringDB 
> label.
> 
> 
> 
> -
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
>   
>  
>  
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
>   
>  
> 
> The Brothers WISP 
>   
> 
> From: "Josh Luthman" 
> To: "Prasun Dey" 
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:23:33 PM
> Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
> 
> >my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
> >as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the interface 
> graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a little little blue 
> line for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential and commercial customers.
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey  > wrote:
> Hi Martijn and Josh,
> Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my requirement so 
> that you may help me better.
> According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
> all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
> Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the 
> other hand, Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim 
> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s 
> own point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, 
> so I’m Heavy Outbound. 
> Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done a 
> better job in formulating my question earlier.
> Thank you.
> 
> -
> Prasun
> 
> Regards,
> Prasun Kanti Dey
> Ph.D. Candidate,
> Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida
> web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/ 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net  - Martijn Schmidt 
> mailto:martijnschm...@i3d.net>> wrote:
> 
> It kinda depends on the application that's being used. For example, 
> videogaming has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5 since you're only transmitting 
> metadata about the players environment across the wire. The actual video is 
> typically rendered at the end user's side. So it's not very bandwidth heavy. 
> 
> Compare that with a videostream (watching a movie or TV series) and you're 
> pumping the rendered video across the wire, so there's a very different 
> ratio. Your return path traffic would pretty much consist of control stuff 
> only (like pushing the pause button).
> 
> Some networks are dedicated to serving one type of content, whereas others 
> might have a blend of different kinds of content. Same story for an access 
> network geared to business users which want to use emails and such, vs 
> residential end users looking for the evening's entertainment.
> 
> Best regards,
> Martijn 
> 
> On 19 June 2019 19:54:45 CEST, Josh Luthman  > wrote:
> If you're asking an ISP, consumers will always be inbound.  It's the end 
> user.  The outbound would be where the information is 

RE: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Steller, Anthony J]

Hi Prasun,

It was updated because ‘Balanced’ wasn’t accurate, we didn’t notice that’s what 
it said until you pointed it out, because it really don’t matter in the whole 
scheme of things. In regards to:

>> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim 
>> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s 
>> own point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, 
>> so I’m Heavy Outbound.

As a residential ISP, we are an eyeball network, we connect to the people using 
the content on the internet (of course with commercial customers also who host 
content, but mainly residential). Because of the nature of the users on our 
network, we are considered Heavy Inbound since most traffic will be going from 
content providers to users on our network. It’s really as simple as that, we do 
no calculation to figure out our traffic ratio and update according to some 
arbitrary ratio number, because none of that matters. That field in PeeringDB 
is used as additional information for someone who may look at the ASN and try 
to determine what to expect in general if connecting to them.

TL;DR - There are no hard numbers to give you, it just depends how someone 
feels that day of the week when setting it.

Hope this helps.


From: Prasun Dey [mailto:pra...@nevada.unr.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 4:08 PM
To: Knopps, Brian; Peering
Cc: Josh Luthman; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

Seems you just have updated today. Thanks for letting us know.
Last time, I checked was yesterday and based on that I mentioned your traffic 
ratio being ‘Balanced’.

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






On Jun 19, 2019, at 4:57 PM, Knopps, Brian 
mailto:brian.kno...@charter.com>> wrote:



From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:24 PM
To: Prasun Dey
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

>my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself as 
>any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)

Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the interface 
graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a little little blue line 
for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential and commercial customers.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey 
mailto:pra...@nevada.unr.edu>> wrote:
Hi Martijn and Josh,
Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my requirement so that 
you may help me better.
According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the other 
hand, Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s own point 
of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, so I’m Heavy 
Outbound.
Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done a 
better job in formulating my question earlier.
Thank you.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/







On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net - Martijn Schmidt 
mailto:martijnschm...@i3d.net>> wrote:

It kinda depends on the application that's being used. For example, videogaming 
has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5 since you're only transmitting metadata 
about the players environment across the wire. The actual video is typically 
rendered at the end user's side. So it's not very bandwidth heavy.

Compare that with a videostream (watching a movie or TV series) and you're 
pumping the rendered video across the wire, so there's a very different ratio. 
Your return path traffic would pretty much consist of control stuff only (like 
pushing the pause button).

Some networks are dedicated to serving one type of content, whereas others 
might have a blend of different kinds of content. Same story for an access 
network geared to business users which want to use emails and such, vs 
residential end users looking for the evening's entertainment.

Best regards,
Martijn
On 19 June 2019 19:54:45 CEST, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
If you're asking an ISP, consumers will always be inbound.  It's the end user.  
The outbound would be where the information is coming from, like data centers.

I'm not sure you're going to get any better answer without a more specific 
question.

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Seems you just have updated today. Thanks for letting us know. 
Last time, I checked was yesterday and based on that I mentioned your traffic 
ratio being ‘Balanced’. 

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






> On Jun 19, 2019, at 4:57 PM, Knopps, Brian  wrote:
> 
> 
>  
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:24 PM
> To: Prasun Dey
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP
>  
> >my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
> >as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)
>  
> Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the interface 
> graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a little little blue 
> line for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential and commercial customers.
>  
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>  
>  
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey  > wrote:
> Hi Martijn and Josh,
> Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my requirement so 
> that you may help me better.
> According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
> all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
> Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the 
> other hand, Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim 
> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s 
> own point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, 
> so I’m Heavy Outbound. 
> Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done a 
> better job in formulating my question earlier.
> Thank you.
>  
> -
> Prasun
>  
> Regards,
> Prasun Kanti Dey
> Ph.D. Candidate,
> Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida
> web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/ 
> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net  - Martijn Schmidt 
> mailto:martijnschm...@i3d.net>> wrote:
>  
> It kinda depends on the application that's being used. For example, 
> videogaming has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5 since you're only transmitting 
> metadata about the players environment across the wire. The actual video is 
> typically rendered at the end user's side. So it's not very bandwidth heavy. 
> 
> Compare that with a videostream (watching a movie or TV series) and you're 
> pumping the rendered video across the wire, so there's a very different 
> ratio. Your return path traffic would pretty much consist of control stuff 
> only (like pushing the pause button).
> 
> Some networks are dedicated to serving one type of content, whereas others 
> might have a blend of different kinds of content. Same story for an access 
> network geared to business users which want to use emails and such, vs 
> residential end users looking for the evening's entertainment.
> 
> Best regards,
> Martijn 
> 
> On 19 June 2019 19:54:45 CEST, Josh Luthman  > wrote:
> If you're asking an ISP, consumers will always be inbound.  It's the end 
> user.  The outbound would be where the information is coming from, like data 
> centers.
>  
> I'm not sure you're going to get any better answer without a more specific 
> question.
>  
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>  
>  
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:50 PM Prasun Dey  > wrote:
> Hello,
> Good morning.
> I’m a Ph.D. candidate from University of Central Florida. I have a query, I 
> hope you can help me with it or at least point me to the right direction.
> I’ve seen from PeeringDB that every ISP reveals its traffic ratio as Heavy/ 
> Mostly Inbound or Balanced or Heavy/ Mostly Outbound. 
> I’m wondering if there is any specific ratio numbers for them. In Norton’s 
> Internet Peering Playbook or some other literary work, they mention the 
> outbound:inbound traffic ratio as 1:1.2 to up to 1:3 for Balanced. But, I 
> couldn’t find the other values.
> I’d really appreciate your help if you can please mention what 
> Outbound:Inbound ratios that network admins use frequently to represent their 
> traffic ratios for 
> 1. Heavy Inbound:
> 2. Mostly Inbound:
> 3. Mostly Outbound:
> 4. Heavy Outbound:
>  
> Thank you.
> -
> Prasun
> -- 
> Sincerely,
> Prasun Kanti Dey,
> Ph.D. candidate,
> Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida.
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. 
>  
> The contents 

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Thank you Aaron, 
This is great. This gives an interesting insight regarding CDN as they seem to 
play a big role here. However, in general, what do you call your ISP as? A 
'Heavy Inbound' or 'Mostly Inbound'? Is there any community standard about this 
ratio (having 1:10 or higher) to be treated as Heavy Inbound? Or this is just a 
rough estimation?

Thank you.
-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:18 PM, Aaron Gould  wrote:
> 
> I run an eyeballs/isp network for about ~50,000 subscribers, and I see about 
> 1:10 ratio at peak time.  Last night ~4.5 gbps out, ~45 gbps in.  But, I do 
> have local caching of 4 big name cdn cache providers, so that might alter the 
> 1:10 ratio I see on my actual inet links (which do not include the local cdn 
> traffic)
>  
> …take Netflix for instance… I see on my local nfx cdn links, 1:100 ratio of 
> in:out.  20 gbps inbound and .2 gbps outbound  (during that same timeframe as 
> aforementioned actual inet links)
>  
> Numbers based on 21:00 CDT last night.
>  
>  
> -Aaron

RE: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Knopps, Brian]

[cid:image001.png@01D526B7.B99D6BB0]

From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Josh Luthman
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2019 3:24 PM
To: Prasun Dey
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

>my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself as 
>any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)

Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the interface 
graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a little little blue line 
for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential and commercial customers.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey 
mailto:pra...@nevada.unr.edu>> wrote:
Hi Martijn and Josh,
Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my requirement so that 
you may help me better.
According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the other 
hand, Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s own point 
of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, so I’m Heavy 
Outbound.
Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done a 
better job in formulating my question earlier.
Thank you.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net - Martijn Schmidt 
mailto:martijnschm...@i3d.net>> wrote:

It kinda depends on the application that's being used. For example, videogaming 
has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5 since you're only transmitting metadata 
about the players environment across the wire. The actual video is typically 
rendered at the end user's side. So it's not very bandwidth heavy.

Compare that with a videostream (watching a movie or TV series) and you're 
pumping the rendered video across the wire, so there's a very different ratio. 
Your return path traffic would pretty much consist of control stuff only (like 
pushing the pause button).

Some networks are dedicated to serving one type of content, whereas others 
might have a blend of different kinds of content. Same story for an access 
network geared to business users which want to use emails and such, vs 
residential end users looking for the evening's entertainment.

Best regards,
Martijn
On 19 June 2019 19:54:45 CEST, Josh Luthman 
mailto:j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>> wrote:
If you're asking an ISP, consumers will always be inbound.  It's the end user.  
The outbound would be where the information is coming from, like data centers.

I'm not sure you're going to get any better answer without a more specific 
question.

Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373


On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:50 PM Prasun Dey 
mailto:pra...@nevada.unr.edu>> wrote:
Hello,
Good morning.
I’m a Ph.D. candidate from University of Central Florida. I have a query, I 
hope you can help me with it or at least point me to the right direction.
I’ve seen from PeeringDB that every ISP reveals its traffic ratio as Heavy/ 
Mostly Inbound or Balanced or Heavy/ Mostly Outbound.
I’m wondering if there is any specific ratio numbers for them. In Norton’s 
Internet Peering Playbook or some other literary work, they mention the 
outbound:inbound traffic ratio as 1:1.2 to up to 1:3 for Balanced. But, I 
couldn’t find the other values.
I’d really appreciate your help if you can please mention what Outbound:Inbound 
ratios that network admins use frequently to represent their traffic ratios for
1. Heavy Inbound:
2. Mostly Inbound:
3. Mostly Outbound:
4. Heavy Outbound:

Thank you.
-
Prasun
--
Sincerely,
Prasun Kanti Dey,
Ph.D. candidate,
Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida.

--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: 
The contents of this e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for 
the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged 
information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or if this 
message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender 
by reply e-mail and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are 
not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, 
distribution, copying, or storage of this message or any attachment is strictly 
prohibited.

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Josh, 
That’s great. I’m assuming your traffic is mainly inbound. So, my question is, 
do you have a threshold that defines your traffic ratio type.
I’m taking an example from this thread. Say, your average incoming traffic is 
~45 gbps, and outgoing traffic is ~4.5 gbps. So, your outbound:inbound = 1:10. 
What are you? Heavy Inbound?
Extending this example, if your ratio is 1:7 or 1:6, then, what would you claim 
to be? A ‘Mostly Inbound’? Or still call yourself as Heavy Inbound? I’m just 
trying to understand what is the community practice?
Thank you. 

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






> On Jun 19, 2019, at 4:23 PM, Josh Luthman  wrote:
> 
> >my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
> >as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)
> 
> Maybe I'm missing something but it's as simple as looking at the interface 
> graphs.  We see a whole lot of green for inbound and a little little blue 
> line for outbound.  We are an ISP with residential and commercial customers.
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 4:20 PM Prasun Dey  > wrote:
> Hi Martijn and Josh,
> Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my requirement so 
> that you may help me better.
> According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
> all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
> Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the 
> other hand, Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
> So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim 
> itself as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s 
> own point of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, 
> so I’m Heavy Outbound. 
> Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done a 
> better job in formulating my question earlier.
> Thank you.
> 
> -
> Prasun
> 
> Regards,
> Prasun Kanti Dey
> Ph.D. Candidate,
> Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida
> web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/ 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net  - Martijn Schmidt 
>> mailto:martijnschm...@i3d.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> It kinda depends on the application that's being used. For example, 
>> videogaming has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5 since you're only 
>> transmitting metadata about the players environment across the wire. The 
>> actual video is typically rendered at the end user's side. So it's not very 
>> bandwidth heavy. 
>> 
>> Compare that with a videostream (watching a movie or TV series) and you're 
>> pumping the rendered video across the wire, so there's a very different 
>> ratio. Your return path traffic would pretty much consist of control stuff 
>> only (like pushing the pause button).
>> 
>> Some networks are dedicated to serving one type of content, whereas others 
>> might have a blend of different kinds of content. Same story for an access 
>> network geared to business users which want to use emails and such, vs 
>> residential end users looking for the evening's entertainment.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Martijn 
>> 
>> On 19 June 2019 19:54:45 CEST, Josh Luthman > > wrote:
>> If you're asking an ISP, consumers will always be inbound.  It's the end 
>> user.  The outbound would be where the information is coming from, like data 
>> centers.
>> 
>> I'm not sure you're going to get any better answer without a more specific 
>> question.
>> 
>> Josh Luthman
>> Office: 937-552-2340
>> Direct: 937-552-2343
>> 1100 Wayne St
>> Suite 1337
>> Troy, OH 45373
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:50 PM Prasun Dey > > wrote:
>> Hello,
>> Good morning.
>> I’m a Ph.D. candidate from University of Central Florida. I have a query, I 
>> hope you can help me with it or at least point me to the right direction.
>> I’ve seen from PeeringDB that every ISP reveals its traffic ratio as Heavy/ 
>> Mostly Inbound or Balanced or Heavy/ Mostly Outbound. 
>> I’m wondering if there is any specific ratio numbers for them. In Norton’s 
>> Internet Peering Playbook or some other literary work, they mention the 
>> outbound:inbound traffic ratio as 1:1.2 to up to 1:3 for Balanced. But, I 
>> couldn’t find the other values.
>> I’d really appreciate your help if you can please mention what 
>> Outbound:Inbound ratios that network admins use frequently to represent 
>> their traffic ratios for 
>> 1. Heavy Inbound:
>> 2. Mostly Inbound:
>> 3. Mostly Outbound:
>> 4. Heavy Outbound:
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> -
>> 

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Hi William, 
Ha ha! Thanks for pointing that out. I’m not related to any ISP at all, so this 
is something new. I understand, PeeringDB is just a basic guideline and ISPs 
put their own information about their traffic ratios. I’m interested to know 
whether ISPs check their own accumulated traffic and then set their own 
outbound:inbound traffic ratios threshold to declare themselves as Heavy 
Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced. Or, is there some kind of rough understanding 
among networking community to treat certain ratios as Heavy/ Mostly Inbound/ 
Outbound. 
Thank you.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:14 PM, William Herrin  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:50 AM Prasun Dey  > wrote:
> > I’m a Ph.D. candidate from University of Central Florida. I have a query, I 
> > hope you can help me with it or at least point me to the right direction.
> > I’ve seen from PeeringDB that every ISP reveals its traffic ratio as Heavy/ 
> > Mostly Inbound or Balanced or Heavy/ Mostly Outbound. 
> > I’m wondering if there is any specific ratio numbers for them. In Norton’s 
> > Internet Peering Playbook or some other literary work, they mention the 
> > outbound:inbound traffic ratio as 1:1.2 to up to 1:3 for Balanced. But, I 
> > couldn’t find the other values.
> 
> Hi Prasun,
> 
> Ratio only masquerades as a technical term. It's whatever it takes to 
> convince the other guy to set up settlement-free peering and you'll tweak 
> your routing adjusting reality to match. The information in peeringdb is just 
> a rough guide to help you figure out who to talk to as you try to adjust your 
> traffic profile so that you can go after the big fish as "balanced."
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
> 
> 
> -- 
> William Herrin
> b...@herrin.us 
> https://bill.herrin.us/ 

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Prasun Dey]

Hi Martijn and Josh,
Thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me explain my requirement so that 
you may help me better.
According to PeeringDB, Charter (Access), Sprint (Transit), Amazon (Content) 
all three of them are ‘Balanced’. While, Cable One, an Access ISP says it is 
Heavy Inbound, while Akamai, Netflix (Content) are Heavy Outbound. On the other 
hand, Cox, another access ISP, it says that it is Mostly Inbound.
So, my question was more like to understand when an ISP decides to claim itself 
as any of these (Heavy Outbound/ Inbound or Balanced)? From an ISP’s own point 
of view, at what point, it says, my outbound:inbound is something, so I’m Heavy 
Outbound. 
Please ignore my lack of knowledge in this area. I’m sorry I should’ve done a 
better job in formulating my question earlier.
Thank you.

-
Prasun

Regards,
Prasun Kanti Dey
Ph.D. Candidate,
Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of Central Florida
web: https://prasunkantidey.github.io/portfolio/






> On Jun 19, 2019, at 2:13 PM, i3D.net - Martijn Schmidt 
>  wrote:
> 
> It kinda depends on the application that's being used. For example, 
> videogaming has a ratio somewhere around 1:2.5 since you're only transmitting 
> metadata about the players environment across the wire. The actual video is 
> typically rendered at the end user's side. So it's not very bandwidth heavy. 
> 
> Compare that with a videostream (watching a movie or TV series) and you're 
> pumping the rendered video across the wire, so there's a very different 
> ratio. Your return path traffic would pretty much consist of control stuff 
> only (like pushing the pause button).
> 
> Some networks are dedicated to serving one type of content, whereas others 
> might have a blend of different kinds of content. Same story for an access 
> network geared to business users which want to use emails and such, vs 
> residential end users looking for the evening's entertainment.
> 
> Best regards,
> Martijn 
> 
> On 19 June 2019 19:54:45 CEST, Josh Luthman  
> wrote:
> If you're asking an ISP, consumers will always be inbound.  It's the end 
> user.  The outbound would be where the information is coming from, like data 
> centers.
> 
> I'm not sure you're going to get any better answer without a more specific 
> question.
> 
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 12:50 PM Prasun Dey  > wrote:
> Hello,
> Good morning.
> I’m a Ph.D. candidate from University of Central Florida. I have a query, I 
> hope you can help me with it or at least point me to the right direction.
> I’ve seen from PeeringDB that every ISP reveals its traffic ratio as Heavy/ 
> Mostly Inbound or Balanced or Heavy/ Mostly Outbound. 
> I’m wondering if there is any specific ratio numbers for them. In Norton’s 
> Internet Peering Playbook or some other literary work, they mention the 
> outbound:inbound traffic ratio as 1:1.2 to up to 1:3 for Balanced. But, I 
> couldn’t find the other values.
> I’d really appreciate your help if you can please mention what 
> Outbound:Inbound ratios that network admins use frequently to represent their 
> traffic ratios for 
> 1. Heavy Inbound:
> 2. Mostly Inbound:
> 3. Mostly Outbound:
> 4. Heavy Outbound:
> 
> Thank you.
> -
> Prasun
> -- 
> Sincerely,
> Prasun Kanti Dey,
> Ph.D. candidate,
> Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
> University of Central Florida.
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: Traffic ratio of an ISP

[Niels Bakker]

* na...@ics-il.net (Mike Hammett) [Wed 19 Jun 2019, 23:19 CEST]:
PeeringDB has categories of ratios to choose from. What has the 
community decided is acceptable ratios for each category? It's 
fairly trivial for any network to determine what their ratio is 
as a number, but not necessarily as a PeeringDB label.


The community has long ago decided that ratios are bullshit


-- Niels.

Re: few big monolithic PEs vs many small PEs

[Tarko Tikan]

hey,


For availability I think it is best approach to do many small edge
devices.


This is also great for planned maintenance. ISSU has not really worked 
out for any of the vendors and with two small devices you can upgrade 
them independently.


Great for aggregation, enables you to dual-home access devices into two 
separate PEs that will never be down at the same time be it failure or 
planned maintenance (excluding the physical issues like power/cooling 
but dual-homing to two separate sites is always problematic for eyeball 
networks).


--
tarko

Re: few big monolithic PEs vs many small PEs

[Saku Ytti]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 at 23:25,  wrote:

> The conclusion I came to was that *currently the best approach would be to
> use several medium to small(fixed) PEs to replace a big monolithic chasses
> based system.

For availability I think it is best approach to do many small edge
devices. Because software is terrible, will always be terrible. People
are bad at operating the devices and will always be. Hardware is is
something we think about lot when we think about redundancy, but it's
not that common reason for an outage.
With more smaller boxes the inevitable human cockup and software
defects will affect fewer customers. Why I believe this to be true, is
because the events are sufficiently rare and once those happen, we
find solution or at very least workaround rather fast. With full
inaction you could argue that having A3 and B1+B2 is same amount of
aggregate outage, as while outage in B affects fewer customers, there
are two B nodes with equal probability of outage. But I argue that the
events are not independent, they are dependent, so probability
calculation isn't straightforward. Once we get some rare software
defect or operator mistake on  B1, we usually solve it before it
triggers on B2, making the aggregate downtime of entire system lower.

> Yes it will cost a bit more (router is more expensive than a LC)

Several of my employees have paid only for LC. I don't think the CAPEX
difference is meaningful, but operating two separate devices may have
significant OPEX implications in electricity, rack space,
provisioning, maintenance etc.

> And yes there is the "node-slicing" approach from Juniper where one can
> offload CP onto multiple x86 servers and assign LCs to each server (virtual
> node) - which would solve my chassis full problem -but honestly how many of
> you are running such setup? Exactly. And that's why I'd be hesitant to
> deploy this solution in production just yet. I don't know of any other
> vendor solution like this one, but who knows maybe in 5 years this is going
> to be the new standard. Anyways I need a solution/strategy for the next 3-5
> years.

Node slicing indeed seems like it can be sufficient compromise here
between OPEX and availability. I believe (not know) that the shared
software risks are meaningfully reduced and that bringing down whole
system is sufficiently rare to allow availability upside compared to
single large box.


-- 
  ++ytti