On Aug 15, 2013, at 00:19 , Sean Donelan <s...@donelan.com> wrote: > On Wed, 14 Aug 2013, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>> It is actually even harder than the above illustrates. Most people define >> "Mbps on the Internet" as inter-AS bits. But then what about Akamai AANP >> nodes, Google GGC nodes, Netflix Open Connect nodes, etc.? They are all >> inside the AS. Given that Akamai claims to be 20% of all broadband traffic, >> Google is on the same order, and NF claims to be 30% of US peak-evening >> traffic, it seems like it would be foolish to ignore this traffic. >> >> I could go on, but you get the point. Definitions are a bitch. > > Some of that may help explain why the Internet traffic estimates seem to be > too high or too low since about 2007. The primary data sources for > the Internet traffic estimates seem to be mostly Internet backbones and > Internet exchange points. > > I hadn't been paying attention until I looked at a bunch of companies' > investor filings this week because the size of the Internet was in the news. > If you add up the percentages that companies are telling investors and policy > makers, you end up with more than 100%. Most of the companies' investor > reports don't explain % of what. But the few that > do, end up pointing back to the same traffic forecast reports. That doesn't > even get to the "long tail" of small providers that don't report anything. > > Either there is a lot of traffic missing, or market concentration is much > greater than assumed. I am not at all surprised the sum of percentages is > 100. User on Joe's-DSL-and-Bait store sends a packet up through Mary's-backbone-and-coffee shop to Bill's-other-transit-and-sandwich cart which finally lands on Comcast. (Didn't see that coming, did you? :) All four networks are going to claim that packet, but a true accounting of "petabytes downloaded per day" will only count it once. -- TTFN, patrick
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
