Downloaded 14 times
Uploaded byWilliam Norton
08 the 20th-century-internet-peering-ecosystem
The document provides a historical perspective on the evolution of internet peering. It describes how peering began in the 1980s between ARPANET and other networks to connect organizations. It then discusses the NSFNET period from 1987-1994 when the National Science Foundation operated the backbone. In the 1994-1996 transition period, peering moved to Network Access Points but these became congested. By the late 1990s, large ISPs moved to private peering arrangements via direct connections due to these issues. This led to the current global internet peering ecosystem with no central coordination.
More Related Content
Similar to 08 the 20th-century-internet-peering-ecosystem
![The Internet and the World Wide Web [Fall 2012 RTF 319 Session 04]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/rtf319session04-120912112238-phpapp02-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
08 the 20th-century-internet-peering-ecosystem
- 1. The Structure of the Yesterday’s Public Internet The 20 Century Internet th Peering Ecosystem ©2012 DrPeering Interna>onal Licensed material – sales@DrPeering.net hDp://DrPeering.net
- 2. 3 THE EARLY INTERNET PEERING ECOSYSTEM Provide a historical perspec>ve on how Internet Peering evolved 2
- 3. Why should we care about the history of peering? About these “peering ecosystems?” 3
- 4. My Airplane Story • NWA Flight DTW-‐LAX DelayàCancel • Rebook, go to gate 34 (short walk) • On plane. Boarding disgruntles • Flight aDendant: “sit anywhere” • Delayed… Palpable Anger What happened? 4
- 5. What happened? • Back at gate • Flight was Cancelled • “Room for 15-‐20 passengers” • “Proceed in orderly fashion” • “Will handle as many as we can” • 154 people hauled • Line à special case override à Mob Scene • Get the yellers out of the line • Aggression, pushing, shoving, many cops called 5
- 6. Who is responsible? • Airline vs. Passengers • Show of hands – ___ Airline 100% Passengers 0% responsible – ___ Airline 90% Passengers 10% responsible – ___ Airline 80% Passengers 20% responsible – ___ Airline 70% Passengers 30% responsible – : 6 Does Context drive Behavior?
- 7. The Peering Problema>c • Evolving Internet Peering context – Posi>onal power – Predictable Behavior • This is a talk about the future of peering – Trajectory from the past • From a Recent Discussion Paper 7
- 8. History of Internet Peering Contexts Access Powers Fat Middle • 2009à • 2000-‐2009 COMMERCIAL • 1998-‐2002 TRANSITION • 1994-‐1997 NSFNET • 1987-‐1994 ARPAnet 8
- 9. 1st Peering: ARPANET 80’s • USENET/BITNET/X.25 could not connect • ARPAnet limited to gov’t & contractors • CSNet-‐NSF project to connect all CS depts • Spotlighted AUP problem • Bureaucra>c complexity – SeDlement of financial, admin, contract etc. • Peering is “interconnec>on without explicit accoun>ng or seDlement” Source: hDp://www.interisle.net/sub/ISP%20Interconnec>on.pdf hDp://drpeering.net/AskDrPeering/blog/ar>cles/Ask_DrPeering/Entries/2010/10/22_Origins_of_Internet_Peering.html 9
- 10. Reference: The First Peering • “This disconnect persisted as both sides assumed that any agreement to exchange traffic would necessarily involve the seDlement of administra>ve, financial, contractual, and a host of other issues, the bureaucra>c complexity of which daunted even the most fervent advocates of interconnec>on – un>l CSNet managers came up with the idea we now call ‘peering’, or the interconnec>on without explicit accoun>ng or seDlement.” Source: hDp://interisle.net/sub/ISP Interconnec>on.pdf 10
- 11. NSFNET – ‘87-‐’94 GrowthàTime to priva>ze The Internet Core Coopera>ve Agreement (Merit,IBM,MCI,…) Open Regional Techs Mee>ngs NSF sponsored aDachments Announce/celebrate new aDachments 11
- 12. NSFNET Transi>on – ’94-‐’96 NSFNET TransiBon Model Network Service Providers (NSPs) Network Access Points (NAPs) Rou>ng Arbiter (RA) Route Servers (RSes) Na>onal Science Founda>on (NSF) Would fund regionals to connect to NSPs that connected to NAPs PacBell NAP AADS NAP MAE-‐East* Sprint NAP Strong NANOG Chair model Interconnect became “a private ma>er” Chair & commercial interests 12
- 13. Commercial Internet – ’96-‐’98 NAPs=“Conges>on Points” Resale & Growth LiDle visibility/sharing àPrivate Peering 13
- 14. Growing Pains Commercial Internet – ’98-‐… NAPs=“Conges>on Points” Resale & Growth LiDle visibility/sharing …Private Peering 14
- 15. So the big guys privately peered with each other Point-‐to-‐Point circuits in each major metropolitan area 15
- 16. Challenges What mo>vated the large ISPs to move out of the NAPs? A) Conges>on problems at the NAPs B) NAPs were operated by compe>tors C) The Na>onal Science Founda>on (NSF) carried liDle weight in the commercial Internet D) all of the above 16
- 17. This led to the Global Internet Peering Ecosystem • Players independently act in their own interests • No U.S. Government operated backbone • Not U.S. Government controlled Internet 17