Exactly. Speed x distance = cost. This is _exactly_ why IXPs get set up. To avoid backhauling bandwidth from Dallas, or wherever. Loss, latency, out-of-order delivery, and jitter. All lower when you source your bandwidth closer.
-Bill > On Oct 15, 2023, at 06:12, Tim Burke <t...@mid.net> wrote: > > It’s better for customer experience to keep it local instead of adding 200 > miles to the route. All of the competition hauls all of their traffic up to > Dallas, so we easily have a nice 8-10ms latency advantage by keeping transit > and peering as close to the customer as possible. > > Plus, you can’t forget to mention another ~$10k MRC per pair in DF costs to > get up to Dallas, not including colo, that we can spend on more transit or > better gear! > >> On Oct 14, 2023, at 23:03, Ryan Hamel <r...@rkhtech.org> wrote: >> >> Why not place the routers in Dallas, aggregate the transit, IXP, and PNI's >> there, and backhaul it over redundant dark fiber with DWDM waves or 400G >> OpenZR? >> >> Ryan >> >> From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+ryan=rkhtech....@nanog.org> on behalf of Tim >> Burke <t...@mid.net> >> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2023 8:45 PM >> To: Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> >> Cc: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this >> time! <nnag...@lists.bufferbloat.net>; libreqos >> <libre...@lists.bufferbloat.net>; NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> >> Subject: Re: transit and peering costs projections Caution: This is an >> external email and may be malicious. Please take care when clicking links or >> opening attachments. >> >> >> I would say that a 1Gbit IP transit in a carrier neutral DC can be had for a >> good bit less than $900 on the wholesale market. >> >> Sadly, IXP’s are seemingly turning into a pay to play game, with rates >> almost costing as much as transit in many cases after you factor in loop >> costs. >> >> For example, in the Houston market (one of the largest and fastest growing >> regions in the US!), we do not have a major IX, so to get up to Dallas it’s >> several thousand for a 100g wave, plus several thousand for a 100g port on >> one of those major IXes. Or, a better option, we can get a 100g flat >> internet transit for just a little bit more. >> >> Fortunately, for us as an eyeball network, there are a good number of major >> content networks that are allowing for private peering in markets like >> Houston for just the cost of a cross connect and a QSFP if you’re in the >> right DC, with Google and some others being the outliers. >> >> So for now, we'll keep paying for transit to get to the others (since it’s >> about as much as transporting IXP from Dallas), and hoping someone at Google >> finally sees Houston as more than a third rate city hanging off of Dallas. >> Or… someone finally brings a worthwhile IX to Houston that gets us more than >> peering to Kansas City. Yeah, I think the former is more likely. 😊 >> >> See y’all in San Diego this week, >> Tim >> >> On Oct 14, 2023, at 18:04, Dave Taht <dave.t...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > This set of trendlines was very interesting. Unfortunately the data >> > stops in 2015. Does anyone have more recent data? >> > >> > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrpeering.net%2Fwhite-papers%2FInternet-Transit-Pricing-Historical-And-Projected.php&data=05%7C01%7Cryan%40rkhtech.org%7Cc8ebae9f0ecd4b368dcb08dbcd319880%7C81c24bb4f9ec4739ba4d25c42594d996%7C0%7C0%7C638329385118876648%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=nQeWrGi%2BblMmtiG9u7SdF3JOi1h9Fni7xXo%2FusZRopA%3D&reserved=0 >> > >> > I believe a gbit circuit that an ISP can resell still runs at about >> > $900 - $1.4k (?) in the usa? How about elsewhere? >> > >> > ... >> > >> > I am under the impression that many IXPs remain very successful, >> > states without them suffer, and I also find the concept of doing micro >> > IXPs at the city level, appealing, and now achievable with cheap gear. >> > Finer grained cross connects between telco and ISP and IXP would lower >> > latencies across town quite hugely... >> > >> > PS I hear ARIN is planning on dropping the price for, and bundling 3 >> > BGP AS numbers at a time, as of the end of this year, also. >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Oct 30: >> > https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnetdevconf.info%2F0x17%2Fnews%2Fthe-maestro-and-the-music-bof.html&data=05%7C01%7Cryan%40rkhtech.org%7Cc8ebae9f0ecd4b368dcb08dbcd319880%7C81c24bb4f9ec4739ba4d25c42594d996%7C0%7C0%7C638329385118876648%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ROLgtoeiBgfAG40UZqS8Zd8vMK%2B0HQB7RV%2FhQRvIcFM%3D&reserved=0 >> > Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP