Date: Sat, 21 Dec 1996 23:01:51 -0500 () From: Bradley Dunn <bradley@dunn.org> To: David Greenman <dg@root.com> Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UUNET vs Netcom Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.3.95.961221225102.-79319K-100000@swoosh.dunn.org> In-Reply-To: <199612220338.TAA21948@root.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 21 Dec 1996, David Greenman wrote: > CRL peers with Sprint at the PB-NAP to avoid congestion that Sprint has > at MAE-west (and probably for other reasons, such as load balancing their > own circuits). Last time I looked, MCI peered with Sprint on the west coast > through a dedicated circuit. CRL also peers at mae-west: 3 sl-chi-6-F0/0.sprintlink.net (144.228.50.6) 13.410 ms 19.669 ms 13.291 ms 4 144.228.10.54 (144.228.10.54) 52.305 ms 52.294 ms 57.106 ms 5 sl-stk-1-F/T.sprintlink.net (198.67.6.1) 53.130 ms 57.866 ms 59.603 ms 6 sl-mae-w-H3/0-T3.sprintlink.net (144.228.10.110) 55.692 ms 68.072 ms 55.365 ms 7 T3-CRL-SFO-01-H1/0.US.CRL.NET (198.32.136.10) 72.085 ms 141.506 ms 230.938 ms Much better than when it all went over the CIX, though. Yes, basically at every exchange point city MCI + Sprint have a private interconnect to bypass the XPs. -BD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.WNT.3.95.961221225102.-79319K-100000>