On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:14 AM, Michiel Klaver <mich...@klaver.it> wrote:
> > Sean Donelan wrote: > > The typical network architecture problem, what are the best (shortest > latency, greatest bandwidth, etc) locations to connect to the every nation > in the world? As you increase the number of locations, how do the choices > change? > > > > If you only had small (2 3 5 7 11) number of locations, where would they > be? > > > > And what data do you have to prove the choices are best? > > > Just a quick wikipedia and google search would provide you the answers > to that: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_Internet_users > > it's possibly useful to take into consideration _overall population since broadband penetration is likely to grow in a population vs. remain stagnant or decrease. That may suggest that the largest submarine cable landing points agggregators (Telehouse, 111 8th, etc. NOTA MIA) would be optimal for shortest reach to multitudes of networks and large amounts of capacity and give you "reach" as well as decent performance. My picks were NOTA facing the Americans, 118th/60 Hudson US, and Telehouse London for Europe. I'm not suggesting that an IX is required. Would be nice to keep costs down if that's also part of the objective, but not required. There's a project that is mapping datacenters onto Google Earth globally and if I could recall the URL I would suggest that a visualization of these answers may be interesting. Best Regards, Martin -- Martin Hannigan mar...@theicelandguy.com p: +16178216079 Power, Network, and Costs Consulting for Iceland Data Centers and Occupants
