From: Dave Cohen <craetdave@gmail.com>
To: "Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
heard this time!" <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Cc: libreqos <libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NNagain] transit and peering costs projections
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2023 20:25:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <186FD2C2-68D1-4DB5-901A-78EFDEC4344D@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw5CqXvn0-CwbDpBxQ2WRcEMQmCSU2+LK6aqxVzZwKt2xA@mail.gmail.com>
I’m a couple years removed from dealing with this on the provider side but the focus has shifted rapidly to adding core capacity and large capacity ports to the extent that smaller capacity ports like 1 Gbps aren’t going to see much more price compression. Cost per bit will come down at higher tiers but there simply isn’t enough focus at lower levels at the hardware providers to afford carriers more price compression at 1 Gbps, even 10 Gbps. I would expect further price compression in access costs but not really in transit costs below 10 Gbps.
In general I agree that IXs continue to proliferate relative to quantity, throughput and geographic reach, almost to the degree that mainland Europe has been covered for years. In my home market of Atlanta, I’m aware of at least four IXs that have been established here or entered the market in the last three years - there were only two major ones prior to that. This is a net positive for a wide variety of reasons but I don’t think it’s created much of an impact in terms of pulling down transit prices. There are a few reasons for this, but primarily because that growth hasn’t really displaced transit demand (at least in my view) and has really been more about a relatively stable set of IX participants creating more resiliency and driving other performance improvements in that leg of the peering ecosystem.
Dave Cohen
craetdave@gmail.com
> On Oct 14, 2023, at 7:02 PM, Dave Taht via Nnagain <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
> This set of trendlines was very interesting. Unfortunately the data
> stops in 2015. Does anyone have more recent data?
>
> https://drpeering.net/white-papers/Internet-Transit-Pricing-Historical-And-Projected.php
>
> 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://netdevconf.info/0x17/news/the-maestro-and-the-music-bof.html
> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-15 0:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-14 23:01 Dave Taht
2023-10-15 0:25 ` Dave Cohen [this message]
2023-10-15 3:41 ` le berger des photons
2023-10-15 3:45 ` Tim Burke
2023-10-15 4:03 ` Ryan Hamel
2023-10-15 4:12 ` Tim Burke
2023-10-15 4:19 ` Dave Taht
2023-10-15 4:26 ` [NNagain] [LibreQoS] " dan
2023-10-15 7:54 ` [NNagain] " Bill Woodcock
2023-10-15 13:41 ` Mike Hammett
2023-10-15 14:19 ` Tim Burke
2023-10-15 16:44 ` [NNagain] [LibreQoS] " dan
2023-10-15 16:32 ` [NNagain] " Tom Beecher
2023-10-15 16:45 ` Dave Taht
2023-10-15 19:59 ` Jack Haverty
2023-10-15 20:39 ` rjmcmahon
2023-10-15 23:44 ` Karl Auerbach
2023-10-16 17:01 ` Dick Roy
2023-10-16 17:35 ` Jack Haverty
2023-10-16 17:36 ` Sebastian Moeller
2023-10-16 18:04 ` Dick Roy
2023-10-17 10:26 ` [NNagain] NN and freedom of speech, and whether there is worthwhile good-faith discussion in that direction Sebastian Moeller
2023-10-17 17:26 ` Spencer Sevilla
2023-10-17 20:06 ` Jack Haverty
2023-10-15 20:45 ` [NNagain] transit and peering costs projections Sebastian Moeller
2023-10-16 1:39 ` [NNagain] The history of congestion control on the internet Dave Taht
2023-10-16 6:30 ` Jack Haverty
2023-10-16 17:21 ` Spencer Sevilla
2023-10-16 17:37 ` Robert McMahon
2023-10-17 15:34 ` Dick Roy
2023-10-16 3:33 ` [NNagain] transit and peering costs projections Matthew Petach
2023-10-15 19:19 ` Tim Burke
2023-10-15 7:40 ` Bill Woodcock
2023-10-15 12:40 ` [NNagain] [LibreQoS] " Jim Troutman
2023-10-15 14:12 ` Tim Burke
2023-10-15 13:38 ` [NNagain] " Mike Hammett
2023-10-15 13:44 ` Mike Hammett
[not found] ` <20231015092253.67e4546e@dataplane.org>
2023-10-15 14:48 ` [NNagain] Fwd: " Dave Taht
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/nnagain.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=186FD2C2-68D1-4DB5-901A-78EFDEC4344D@gmail.com \
--to=craetdave@gmail.com \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net \
--cc=nanog@nanog.org \
--cc=nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox