Re: Cost of transit and options in APAC
...the cost of captial, and regulatory or monopoloy capture than it does with some artifical lack of price equilibrium. now that sounds like fodder for a different list ;) On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Joel Jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote: On 8/11/10 12:29 PM, Franck Martin wrote: Nice to see this change APAC has been obliged to pay the cost to peer with the US (long distance links are expensive). Now that US wants to peer with Asia, pricing may become more balanced... I think the question is more like why am I being quoted $100 A megabit in India for transit in India? Not why am I being charged for for the transport cost across the pacific. The answer has more to do with the maturity of comms infrastructure, the cost of captial, and regulatory or monopoloy capture than it does with some artifical lack of price equilibrium. - Original Message - From: David Ulevitch da...@ulevitch.com To: na...@merit.edu Sent: Thursday, 12 August, 2010 7:00:12 AM Subject: Cost of transit and options in APAC Hi Nanog, As we extend our reach into Asia, we're finding that our typical carriers (see: upstreams of AS36692) who provide service to us in North America and Europe are not able to offer us service in Asia either (1) at all or (2) at prices remotely resembling our pricing in NA and EU. For example: Level(3) simply has no presence in Asia and on the pricing side, NTT, GBLX, Verizon and others' pricing is many times higher than their NA and EU pricing. In most cases, it's 10 or more times higher. Additionally, some of the networks seem to market their network based on their reach into the US, rather than their reach into actual users in Asia, which is what we're looking for. So my question is, what are non-APAC-based networks doing as they expand into Asia for transit beyond peering with whomever will peer with them to get close to actual users in Asia? Are people using regional carriers? Are people just paying the crazy (compared to US pricing) bandwidth costs? Are people doing peering-only setups out there? Any help would be useful -- hopefully this is on-topic for NANOG, which I think it is, since I'm curious how NA operators deal with these challenges as they expand into APAC. I'm happy to summarize responses later if there is interest. Thanks, David -- Respectfully, Chris Hart Developer / System Administrator Insuremonkey.com 2080 E. Flamingo, Suite 223 Las Vegas, NV 89119
Re: SA pigeon 'faster than broadband'
Edible, self-replicating IP carriers are pretty special anyhow. Mainstream IPv6 Here we come! ;) On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 3:37 PM, Richard Bennett rich...@bennett.comwrote: If this news had come out a little earlier, some pigeon breeding programs may have qualified for broadband stimulus grants. Edible, self-replicating IP carriers are pretty special anyhow. Scott Weeks wrote: --- n...@foobar.org wrote: So, good news all around. Let's hope that IP over carrier pigeon will soon become a thing of the past. - 4GB = 32Gb 32Gb in 2 hours is 4.45Mbps. That's a pretty good DSL upstream bandwidth. scott -- Richard Bennett Research Fellow Information Technology and Innovation Foundation Washington, DC -- Respectfully, Chris Hart Systems Administrator Extrameasures, LLC. 8910 University Center Lane, Suite 475 San Diego, CA 92122 Office - 858.546.1052 x32 Fax - 858.546.1057
Re: Fiber cut in SF area
Rofl Matt, I was recently laid off from my job for 'economic' reasons, what you say is deadly accurate. Bravo! :) On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Matthew Petach mpet...@netflight.comwrote: On 4/13/09, George William Herbert gherb...@retro.com wrote: Matthew Petach wrote: George William Herbert gherb...@retro.com wrote: Matthew Petach writes: [much material snipped in the interests of saving precious electron resources...] This was all in one geographical area. Diversity out of area will get you around single points like that, if you know the overall topology of the fiber networks around the US and chose locations carefully. But even that won't protect you against common mode vendor hardware failures, or a largescale BGP outage, or the routing chaos that comes with a very serious regional net outage (exchange points, major undersea cable cuts, etc) There may be 4 or 5 nines, but the 1 at the end has your name on it. Ultimately, I think a .sig line I saw years back summed it up very succinctly: Earth is a single point of failure. Below that, you're right, we're all just quibbling about which digits to put to the right of the decimal point. If the entire west coast of the US drops into the ocean, yes, having my data backed up on different continents will help; but I'll be swimming with the sharks at that point, and won't really be able to care much, so the extent of my disaster planning tends to peter out around the point where entire states disappear, and most definitely doesn't even wander into the realm of entire continents getting cut off, or the planet getting incinerated in a massive solar flare. Fundamentally, though, I think it's actually good we have outages periodically; they help keep us employed. When networks run too smoothly, management tends to look upon us as unnecessary overhead that can be trimmed back during the next round of layoffs. The more they realize we're the only bulwark against the impending forces of chaos you mentioned above, the less likely they are to trim us off the payroll. Matt Note--tongue was firmly planted in cheek; no slight was intended against those who may have lost jobs recently; post was intended for humourous consumption only; any resemblence to useful content was purely coincidental and not condoned by any present or past employer. Repeated exposure may be habit forming. Do not read while operating heavy machinery. -- Respectfully, Chris Hart George Carlinhttp://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_carlin.html - Frisbeetarianism is the belief that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and gets stu...
