[AusNOG] Domestic Peering WAS: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?

[Peter Childs]

Is this issue perhaps that without being able to demonstrate that a dominant carrier is using its position of dominance, through action or inaction, to stifle competition that you aren't really going to see any regulator take any steps to resolve peering concerns?

Being completely unaware of any of the commercials or logistics does the price of transit in Australia > price-of-transit-in-not-AU + cost-of-getting-that-back-to-AU ?

Does the fact that these large players won't 'peer' with smaller players prevent competition in the market?


From: Zone Networks - Joel <joel at zonenetworks.com.au<mailto:joel at zonenetworks.com.au>>
Date: Tuesday, 13 November 2012 11:53 AM
To: 'Joshua D'Alton' <joshua at railgun.com.au<mailto:joshua at railgun.com.au>>, "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>" <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Domestic Peering WAS: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?

Sean’s idea is not a bad…

but I reckon the end user’s, cable/adsl customer etc need to be educated first.. about what GO4 is doing to domestic traffic

most gamers understand latency etc…
if you going to route GO4 traffic to US, gamers will be your best friends if you want to cause a shit storm…
They will give GO4 support hell…

Gamers whinge if they is an increase in latency by 5-10 ms… we are talking about 100ms+ here

To my knowledge most of the major game networks are hosted outside of GO4, except for Game Arena
That is including major game releases from the likes of EA Sports which are hosted privately



From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net> [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Joshua D'Alton
Sent: Tuesday, 13 November 2012 11:43 AM
To: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Domestic Peering WAS: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?

Well its really just economics, supply and demand (which is low in our case).

All the Telstra gamer customers will care about latency to their game servers, but I guess the majority of customers probably won't be impacted by latency :/ If it was done before, when and to what result, and why isn't it still happening if it saves costs ?
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:00 AM, Mark Prior <mrp at mrp.net<mailto:mrp at mrp.net>> wrote:
On 12/11/12 8:55 PM, Joshua D'Alton wrote:
Anyway... Perhaps greater cooperation amongst providers in AU would be
able to breach the Reach (har har) and achieve the sort of pricing that
you see on trans-atlantic (transit basically) links::
http://www.hiberniaatlantic.com/documents/ProjectKelvin-PricingMarch20111_000.pdf

I'll leave it to Bevin to explain cable economics 101 :-)

Seans Idea of pumping all the traffic overseas for a week to pwn the Go4
is a great idea, what would be better is the establishment of a
"not-for-profit" consortium that got together to bully the Go4 into
submission. The best thing about it is even the dedicated server
providers that have them used by gamers won't be bearing much of a brunt
as it will be T$lstra who has to explain why latency to next door
neighbour on iiNet is being routed via SJ while iiNet customer enjoys
low latency to 90% of providers who do choose to peer. Or at least that
would be the idea (trollface), maybe someone experienced could think of
the actual ramifications and possibilities..

You make the flawed assumption that they care about latency to other providers. Also been there and tried it.

Mark.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20121113/5bce8359/attachment.html>