Useful site. I found it particular intersting that Level3 was high up on all teh stats. These are all good metric for evaluating provider's peering relevence and size.
What these sites dont help with is tell you the capacity or throughput accross the routes. A company could have 1000 more peers than someone else, but if they were all 100 mbps peers, it might not deliver near as much performance if all the peers were 10GB. What would be interesting would be to have stats on average capacity per peer connection. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Hammett" <[email protected]> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 2:25 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams > Many carriers swap routes around. > > http://www.fixedorbit.com/stats.htm > http://www.fixedorbit.com/AS/2/AS2828.htm > > According to: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tier_1_network > > XO has paid peering with Sprint and L3, but some information on that page > isn't exactly current with things I've heard elsewhere. > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Josh Luthman" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 4:31 PM > To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [WISPA] choice of upstreams > >> Isn't XO a Level3 reseller? >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> "When you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however >> improbable, must be the truth." >> --- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 5:28 PM, Tom DeReggi >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> It should be noted that an Upstreams performance can be directly >>> proportional to the location where they have more peering. >>> In the DC and NY markets, Cogent has excellent performance and peering, >>> and >>> has shown to outperform EVERY provider we have tried, period. >>> (And yes, some of the carriers we tried were Level3, XO, and Abovenet.) >>> I recognize that Cogent's performance "may" not be as good for ALL >>> markets >>> where they potentially could have a weaker presence. >>> But saying Cogent is only worthy of the 3rd or 4th transit connection >>> is >>> simply untrue. >>> >>> Cogent's weak point now is internal processes and communication. They've >>> lost touch with the value of having personal Account Reps, and render >>> the >>> reps powerless to manage the accounts, in favor of the customer >>> relationship >>> managed by the clueless billing/collections department. Its a shame. You >>> might even get away with saying Cogent has a few more short duration >>> (less >>> than 15 minutes?) outages than other carriers. But their tech support >>> has >>> been the best by far in the industry, and oversubscription has never >>> been >>> a >>> problem from what I see. >>> >>> In picking a Transit provider its really a decision about where your >>> traffic >>> typically flows, and where you need good performance to. NOT anyone has >>> best >>> performance everywhere. >>> For example, Hurricane has excellent performance AND they are >>> inexpensive. >>> They have a really good peering presensence in CA. I'm not confident >>> that >>> they have nearly as good a presence on the East coast though, but those >>> that >>> have used them on teh east coast that I know have been happy. We were >>> considering using them. >>> >>> Abovenet has great Gig-E Transport. But their transit is expensive, and >>> its >>> because its more expensive for them to provide it, because they are not >>> as >>> well positioned to do it cost effectively, not because its necessarilly >>> better. Level3 as well, has many strength. They have a lot of web host >>> clients. It can really help performance to reach certain sites. Level3 >>> also >>> tends to blocks smaller BGP block announcements, more so than someone >>> like >>> Cogent. Level3 is good for a secondaryu because they usually have >>> diverse >>> routes. Some providers have good performance to France, Amsterdam, >>> India, >>> others dont. Savvis tends to have real peering to NY finacnial markets. >>> I >>> often see Blended bandwdith combining Global Cross and Level3, not sure >>> why >>> these two are chosen as a pair. Maybe its simply becaue they tend to be >>> colocated at the same carrier hotels? >>> >>> But selecting a transit provider is not as simple as saying one is >>> better. >>> My personaly opinion is, find the two lowest cost providers, and then >>> you >>> can afford to buy more bandwidth, and have two options to route >>> customers. >>> >>> You also need to consider the path to where you take it. For example, >>> Cogent >>> remote tenant buildings likely have routers with less ram that cant >>> handle >>> full BGP tables, so they require creating session to two seperate BGP >>> servers (with the second one having full routes.). But of you connect >>> to >>> them inb a major colo center that doesn;t exist. Similar things exist >>> with >>> other providers depending on where you pick up the circuit. >>> >>> What I like about Abovenet, is they'll map out their network for you, so > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
