Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Double paid traffic

wiki.hetzner.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 106 posts

Re: Double paid traffic

#81

Post by digikata »

j_jochem wrote: post #9
viraptor wrote: post #2

I'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)

I think this might actually a good idea. Instead of just paying the peering fee quietly, they give customers the choice to vote with their money. Alas, "customers" here are not end users, but companies who provide content on the internet. I really like that paying up to DTAG is not the default and is more bureaucratic. This might already be enough to kill the ISPs' profiteering schemes, similiar to what happened with…

I think more visibility is better, and in this case maybe would give tech companies some food for thought re: how they approach net neutrality issues in politics.

Re: Double paid traffic

#82

Post by scurvy »

germanier wrote: post #72
ullus12 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

was reffering to geographical, not political east/west

That's not how it works. While there is an east/west divide in Germany, it's along the former border. Bavaria is amongst the most expensive places in Germany in regards to labor and land. Also not more government subsidies than anywhere else in the former West. Sure, you save a lot by going east. But that means the real east, i.e. the new states.

I'm really dubious of the claim that labor in .de is super expensive. I know that most software devs there make way less thank 100K euro's/year. That's much, much lower compared to the US. Housing costs (buy/rent) in .DE are much lower compared to the US as well.

I have coworkers in Berlin who are pitching me to move over there because it's so easy to live well there.

Edit: I think the problem with "high labor costs" is not monetary, but bureaucratic. It's damn near impossible to get people to work near 40 hours a week. It's hard to get them to do on-call shift work. It's also really difficult to fire people in .de

Re: Double paid traffic

#83

Post by amazon_not »

rmoriz wrote: post #74
amazon_not wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 e…

> That's exactly what the article states. No. Hetzner is not able to provide direct Telekom traffic. Their offer is missleading. Hetzner makes a profit of 36mio EUR/year. It's a shady move. Telekom sucks but Hetzner is not any better.

What on earth are you going on about?

The article in no way states that Hetzner has a direct connection to DTAG. It very clearly states that they route the traffic to DTAG via Core-Backbone.

Re: Double paid traffic

#84

Post by scurvy »

Nyr wrote: post #63
zuckerei wrote: post #61

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?

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.

There are reach products that will help you connect and peer to providers in remote IX's. You can peer with them directly, then have their traffic ride on your network all the way back. MPLS is a wonderful thing.

Yeah, you'll still need a lot of transit to reach people, but you can also peer with who you want.

Re: Double paid traffic

#85

Post by tveita »

ullus12 wrote: post #65
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 preffer…

Without any additional details your contrasting of "cheapass open" vs "scalable private peerings" seems completely baseless. Why is DTAG not the cheapass for skimping on their public pairings?

Re: Double paid traffic

#86

Post by scurvy »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #50
thomaskcr wrote: post #10

> They now also want to collect revenue by charging large content providers fees for access to their network Isn't what they are advocating for the exact opposite of net neutrality? Everyone's connection is saturated, but they argue that because they are a large content provider they should get special treatment and not need to pay for direct access. Smaller companies are equally affected during peak hours, but they…

This is not about the size of some content provider, but about not providing the service they bill their customers for. The DSL subscriber pays for an internet connection at n Mbit/s. Note: The DSL subscriber does not pay for a line to their local central office, the product telcos sell to end customers is internet access. Now, these customers who have bought internet access request some data transfer from some serve…

> That certainly is not due to costs, hardware for bigger pipes never gets more expensive the more you buy.

That depends. It's currently the case for 100gig (minus xconnect costs) depending on vendor platform. Cisco's yield on their CPAK modules is rumored to be in the low single digits. If you can actually get your hands on a working module, they're crazy expensive right now. People are hoarding them and saying "which customer is this really worth or will pay me the most?"

The Cisco 100gig situation is so bad right now, that there is a very large international carrier looking to replace their Cisco edge with Juniper.

Re: Double paid traffic

#87

Post by X-Istence »

rmoriz wrote: post #59

Did 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.

If DTAG allows it, they can accept an advertisement for a single /32 if wanted in their BGP tables, this would allow traffic to that IP address to flow from DTAG -> Private Peering-> Hetzner.

For the reverse, for traffic leaving Hetzner's network, Hetzner would have to set up source based routing which specifically sets the next hop for certain sources/destinations to the router that is peering with DTAG.

This is technically very possible, just complicated.

Re: Double paid traffic

#88

Post by scurvy »

Spooky23 wrote: post #70
Pyxl101 wrote: post #3

Frequently 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 techni…

We start the process to add more peering ports once we see sustained traffic at 40% of port capacity (in PPS or BPS). The process takes a while depending on who you're dealing with, and before you know it, you're up to 80% right before that new port comes online.

Re: Double paid traffic

#89

Post by scurvy »

kennysmoothx wrote: post #75

I hope this does not fall on deafs ears but I am experiencing this EXACT thing with OVH(Canada's Mega Datacentre). I have compared speeds directly to OVH's servers, and indirectly through a reverse proxy, and AT&T throttles direct connections to OVH. When I prompted OVH about it they confirmed to me that AT&T requested that they pay them for priority bandwidth and they refused (as is their right) and now my customers…

Speeds in which direction? To OVH or from OVH?

Re: Double paid traffic

#90

Post by ehPReth »

kennysmoothx wrote: post #75

I hope this does not fall on deafs ears but I am experiencing this EXACT thing with OVH(Canada's Mega Datacentre). I have compared speeds directly to OVH's servers, and indirectly through a reverse proxy, and AT&T throttles direct connections to OVH. When I prompted OVH about it they confirmed to me that AT&T requested that they pay them for priority bandwidth and they refused (as is their right) and now my customers…

This may be a bit unrelated, but OVH provides a publicly accessible weather map of their network (something I wish more ISPs/providers did): http://weathermap.ovh.net/
Post reply on HN