I have a Server in Germany. But my visitors are from all over the world. Will I have to pay to every ISP out there so my data gets to their customers quick?
Double paid traffic
61–70 of 106 posts
Re: Double paid traffic
#62Did anyone verify the information? I think it's a hoax to drive cusomers mad/against Deutsche Telekom. - It's not possible to announce a specific (premium) routing for just a single IP address. - Hetzner has no DTAG Transit anymore. none. Not even for specific customers. See AS24940 - Current DTAG->Hetzner traffic uses AS33891. See https://f-lga1.f.de.net.dtag.de/ Of course this does not object the non-peering-policy…
Verification for which part? Hetzner used to have DTAG peering but dropped it a year ago because Telecom wants to have a premium paid for it. Hetzner was not willing to carve. This is just the response to some customers wanting to have faster connection to T customers. This story is unfortunately not new.
//EDIT: this thread goes back more than two years: https://telekomhilft.telekom.de/t5/Telefonie-Internet/Perfor...
Re: Double paid traffic
#63I have a Server in Germany. But my visitors are from all over the world. Will I have to pay to every ISP out there so my data gets to their customers quick?
No, since you will be forced to use transit to reach many of your visitors.
You don't even have the choice of direct connections to all of the world with just a single server in Germany.
Re: Double paid traffic
#64This is the correct approach. The ISP pulls their bullshit. Service passes the cost on to customers. Customers move to different ISP. ISP eventually learns lesson.
Of course, this only works if there is competition between ISPs.
Re: Double paid traffic
#65Hetzner is not just saving on private peerings. Most of their Servers are in east-germany where * labor,land,power,darkfibre is cheaper * they can harvest developement subs from the goverment [1] Whereas peering (DE-CIX) is most dense in Frankfurt, West-Germany. [1] https://translate.google.de/translate?hl=de&sl=de&tl=en&u=ht...
1. What's the logic here? Because a business is trying to reduce its expenses, it's wrong on any matter by default? 2. You are aware that DTAG does not peer at DE-CIX, so whether "peering is most dense" there has exactly no influence on whether Hetzner gets good connectivity to DTAG? 3. You are aware that Hetzner does peer at DE-CIX with 200 Gbit/s, with an open peering policy? 4. You are aware that Hetzner even peer…
1. The idea was to make an example of the company favoring cost effevtiveness over quality. which may not be bad ... but it should underline the cheap-assiness.
2. dtag is ofc present in frankfurt and at de-cix, with little capacity for public peerings as mentioned.
This and your 3/4 each make sense, as they represent a legit business interest for the different sides. Hetzner preffering cheapass open and dtag preffering scalable private peerings.
Problem i see is Hetzner externalizing the cost of private peerings. Which in return plays into 1. and the example of them externalizing other cost factors.
Re: Double paid traffic
#66Did anyone verify the information? I think it's a hoax to drive cusomers mad/against Deutsche Telekom. - It's not possible to announce a specific (premium) routing for just a single IP address. - Hetzner has no DTAG Transit anymore. none. Not even for specific customers. See AS24940 - Current DTAG->Hetzner traffic uses AS33891. See https://f-lga1.f.de.net.dtag.de/ Of course this does not object the non-peering-policy…
> I think it's a hoax to drive cusomers mad/against Deutsche Telekom.
You don't need a hoax for that. Everybody in the industry is already pissed at DTAG.
> - It's not possible to announce a specific (premium) routing for just a single IP address.
Wrong. Google source based routing. You'll get asymmetric routing, but that's rarely an issue for content providers.
> - Current DTAG->Hetzner traffic uses AS33891
That's exactly what the article states.
Re: Double paid traffic
#67Did anyone verify the information? I think it's a hoax to drive cusomers mad/against Deutsche Telekom. - It's not possible to announce a specific (premium) routing for just a single IP address. - Hetzner has no DTAG Transit anymore. none. Not even for specific customers. See AS24940 - Current DTAG->Hetzner traffic uses AS33891. See https://f-lga1.f.de.net.dtag.de/ Of course this does not object the non-peering-policy…
In order to deliver traffic to DTAG, you don't need to announce anything. This is about traffic from Hetzner to DTAG, not the other way around, Hetzner will accept traffic destined to it whereever it is delivered without asking for payment.
Re: Double paid traffic
#68Did anyone verify the information? I think it's a hoax to drive cusomers mad/against Deutsche Telekom. - It's not possible to announce a specific (premium) routing for just a single IP address. - Hetzner has no DTAG Transit anymore. none. Not even for specific customers. See AS24940 - Current DTAG->Hetzner traffic uses AS33891. See https://f-lga1.f.de.net.dtag.de/ Of course this does not object the non-peering-policy…
> - It's not possible to announce a specific (premium) routing for just a single IP address.
As someone else stated, its technically possible.
Similarly, they could require you to add an IP that is part of the block they've setup solely for customers that pick this option.
> Did anyone verify the information? I think it's a hoax to drive cusomers mad/against Deutsche Telekom.
It isn't a "hoax", DTAG does charge for private peering and their public peering is subpar.
> - Hetzner has no DTAG Transit anymore. none. Not even for specific customers. See AS24940
Its via Core-Backbone as they stated.
> This option costs € 4.20 a month for all of our servers. With this add-on, we will connect an uplink to DTAG via Core-Backbone
Core-Backbone sells private peering to DTAG. Given its an experimental setup, its not surprising Hetzner isn't committing to a contract with DTAG and going through what is essentially a reseller.
Re: Double paid traffic
#69I'm not sure how to interpret this post. Is this basically: "we believe in network neutrality, but here's reality for today: your ISP won't expand capacity, so you can pay us to add special uplink"? It looks like testing the ground for idea of "pay per peering" that becomes a separate line on your invoice. (and I mean for any peering, you rent server and connectivity separately)
> Make sure to clearly state that you would like to order the DTAG uplink in the text field of the request and that you agree to pay the additional € 4.20 a month. The add-on will be called "Double Paid Traffic" on your bill.
I think the name "double paid traffic" is a very clear statement. They are not trying to sugarcoat this or anything. They just don't want to loose customers over this.
Re: Double paid traffic
#70Frequently it seems as though statements by neutrality advocates mention "providers" without naming any. Who are the providers that misbehave, and what are they doing? Can we see a graph of their traffic and a depiction of the misbehavior? (Saturated links, offers to peer and expand the links that are refused, etc.) I'd love it if the evidence were laid out. Unfortunately at the moment, it seems like there's a lot of…
In an (admittedly different) enterprise scenario, I see consistent 50-60% peak utilization as right-sized. 75% or more is tagged for an upgrade or at least analysis to understand the traffic patterns. For a big network to deliver 100 Mbps vs. 1 Mbps connectivity to most locations is a very small cost. The big costs are the fixed costs the initial buildout.
Marginal capacity changes are pretty cheap. There's no technical reason to treat network links as constrained resources. So as a network provider, you only create constraint to make money.
Think of it as food & drink in a movie theatre. A bag of popcorn at the Target snack counter is $1.50. A bag of popcorn at the movies is $9. Same product, both high-margin scenarios -- the difference is you're captive to the movie theatre.