Re: different thinking on exchanging traffic

[Tom Perrine <tep () SDSC EDU>]

> > > > > The moving finger of Jay R Ashworth, having written:

      <SNIP>

    Jay> Because, more and more as the net penetrates, the traffic is more and
    Jay> more _local_.  Geographically local.  My point about MAE-East-in-a-garage
    Jay> was that there was only _one_ of them; where it _was_ was only thrown
    Jay> in for spite.

    Jay> Especially as the net becomes more used for telecommuting, there is
    Jay> absolutely _no_ sense in my having to telnet from St Pete 30 miles to
    Jay> Tampa via a router in Maryland or San Francisco, "just" because the two
    Jay> sites in question decided to buy their connectivity from different
    Jay> backbones.

Yup.  Especially in places with a high-density of high-tech, lousy
commutes and a high penetration of "home" Internet access and many
ISPs.

Currently there are at least 60 ISPs serving the San Diego county
area.  There are LOTS of packets from "home" to "office" that make a
round-trip via MAE-West.  Some people have decided that this is
silly.  Even if it is "cost-effective", it *squanders* bandwidth at
MAE-West that could best be used for other traffic.

I wonder how much bandwidth at the MAEs could be saved if more areas
built local low-cost NAPs just for local traffice exchanges?

See this URL for details on the SD-NAP project:
http://www.caida.org/Caida/caidaix.html