Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Info on MAE-EAST
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb () clark net>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:02:16 -0500

At 2:17 PM -0800 1/17/97, dave o'leary wrote:
At 7:00 -0800 1/16/97, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
I can't claim to have recent numbers that suggest otherwise, but, some
historical information might at least be interesting.  In the early 80s, I
did a good deal of X.25 capacity planning.  At what was then GTE Telenet,
we found that up to 50% of our traffic stayed local in large cities.  The
larger the city, the more that seemed to stay local...this was especially
obvious in New York, where a great deal of financial data flowed.

remember that in the early 80's you basically couldn't lease a T1
from AT&T (I think it was 82 or so when they were first tariffed?)

Dave, reality was funnier than that.  It was 1980 or so when we actually
did get a T1 between Washington and New York, but eventually released it
because all of the DC-NY public network traffic wasn't enough to justify
that HUGE amount of bandwidth.

I did get the first nonmilitary T1 in the DC area in '77 or '78 at the
Library of Congress.  The then C&P Telephone couldn't really figure out how
to charge for it, so we got it dirt cheap -- and it worked very well.

(watch out for that DC voltage...ouch! :-).

I have a very painful memory of running my finger over a punchdown with
some stranded wire that slightly got loose and broke the skin.  Knocked me
flat and sprained my shoulder.

also DDS services were scarce, etc.  So (expensive) low speed analog
was the option for leased lines - and private networks were rare.
Since then of course the fallout from Judge Greene has changed some
things, and it is cheap and easy to put up a DS0 across town - the
cost justification vs. per packet charges is a lot different.

Now, these old statistics reflect mainframe-centric traffic, and more
private-to-private than arbitrary public access.  The latter is much more
characteristic of Internet traffic.

SNA and X.25 tended to emphasize the ability to fine tune access to a
limited number of well-known resources, with relatively well-understood
traffic patterns.  The Internet, however, has emphasized arbitrary and
flexible connectivity, possibly to the detriment of performance tuning and

well the strategies for performance tuning are certainly different.

[stuff cut]

Web cacheing would seem to encourage traffic to stay local.



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]