Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 20:44:02 -0800 From: David Greenman <dg@root.com> To: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CRL <--> MCI at pacbell NAP Message-ID: <199702170444.UAA04626@root.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 16 Feb 1997 19:29:19 MST." <Pine.BSF.3.95.970216192438.6083C-100000@alive.znep.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Part of a traceroute to wcarchive: > > 9 pacbell-nap-atm.SanFrancisco.mci.net (204.70.1.202) 48.998 ms 50.476 ms 49.367 ms >10 pacbell-nap-atm.SanFrancisco.mci.net (204.70.1.202) 53.675 ms 47.162 ms 61.408 ms >11 pb-nap.crl.net (198.32.128.20) 1513.402 ms * * >12 * wcarchive.cdrom.com (165.113.58.253) 483.625 ms * > >Not so hot; can't get more than 1 kbyte/sec from wcarchive when normally >I can get over 200. <sigh> > >Anyone have any idea whose fault it is (looks like CRL to me, but could >be something else at the NAP) and when it will be fixed? Guess I could >manually route around it but that's annoying. Yes, it's MCI's fault. Their connection to the PB-NAP is overloaded (by at least a factor of 2 as near as I can tell). CRL has been bugging them about it, but the word from MCI is that there is no plan to upgrade their connection to the NAP to OC3 (155Mbps); I believe it is currently only 34Mbps, but might be DS3. It appears that this policy is an attempt to force larger service providers into doing 'private' peering (i.e. via a private point-to-point connection between the providers, bypassing the NAP). CRL has requested that such a connection be established and has not yet heard back from MCI on it. If MCI does agree to this, each provider will purchase a DS3 connection to the other and the traffic will be load balanced between the two - providing a total bandwidth of 90Mbps in each direction. -DG David Greenman Core-team/Principal Architect, The FreeBSD Project
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199702170444.UAA04626>