5 ms·
Dear god, they chose the two cheapest upstream providers on the market [1]. It's a shame they didn't pick up a higher quality carrier to handle the majority of
by vlan0 11y ago
Dear god, they chose the two cheapest upstream providers on the market [1]. It's a shame they didn't pick up a higher quality carrier to handle the majority of their traffic.
[1] http://bgp.he.net/AS394141#_asinfo http://bgp.he.net/AS394141#_asinfo
- organsnyder 11y agoThat's easy enough to change later if their upstreams struggle to meet demand. Once they have the last mile finished, the rest is much easier by comparison.
- vlan0 11y agoThat it is. Now to convince management of that...oy vey
- ju-st 11y agoWhy would you need premium providers for an eyeball network these days?
- amazon_not 11y agoBecause even eyeballs need to be reachable and it gets old real fast if only Netflix and Youtube work.
- vlan0 11y agoThis is what I'm getting at. Being able to provide the throughput needed is awesome, but latency and jitter can be real concern.
- toomuchtodo 11y agoOnly for VoIP or video conferencing. Anything else is bulk transfer, and VoD or steaming video can make up with larger buffers.
- nullrouted 11y agoWhat high quality carrier would you recommend for Detroit? They can go to Cogent, HE, Level3 or one of their competing Telcos. There is nothing wrong with using Cogent/HE for their eyeball network, it gives them cheap connectivity and allows Cogent/HE to balance their traffic ratios Win/Win. Also to note Google Fiber uses a lot of nLayer/GTT for their eyeball traffic.
- vlan0 11y agoI can't really speak for that area. But if I chose out of three you listed, it would be L3. A close friend of mine spent years managing the network of a smaller ISP in the northeast using both Cogent/HE for their eyeball network, and he was constantly telling me about packet loss issues with Cogent. On the other hand, I haven't seen as many issues with HE as a whole, more localized. Either way using the cheaper options is a good choice if you want to keep costs low during expansion. Hell, it's probably still better than what I see through TWC.
- toomuchtodo 11y agoMeh, I used to use Cogent in the mix of transit providers for hosting services, and it was more than adequate when peering spats weren't going on (in which case we'd dump traffic over to Hurricane Electric or Global Crossing). Want quality bandwidth? Pay for quality bandwidth. Most people just want their packets delivered, a few extra 10s of milliseconds be damned.
- X-Istence 11y agoI haven't heard anything bad about HE... what's wrong with them?
- vlan0 11y agoI actually haven't heard a great deal of negative for HE as a whole, but mainly some localized spots. In hindsight, it might have been a bit too much of a generalization.