Perhaps this is a stupied question, but anyone care to explain to me just what Tier 1 bandwidth is, and a good list of such providers? My understanding is that they're somehow better in quality, more expensive, and one such provider being Verio.

Thanks,

To be a Tier1 internet provider you must peer with all the other Tier1 Internet providers. This typically means the provider peers with other providers at the MAE's or has private-peering.

Examples of Tier1 providers are UUNet, Sprint, Qwest, Epoch. Tier2 means you buy from Tier1 providers. Pacific Bell, Level3, Cogent are considered Tier2 providers.

Actually, according to a press release I read yesterday, Cogent claims to be a Tier-1 provider.

Originally posted by bombino
Actually, according to a press release I read yesterday, Cogent claims to be a Tier-1 provider.

Everyone claims to be a Tier1 :D. A generally accepted definition of a Tier 1 provider is someone who does not have to pay for peering. Cogent pays for peering, so they are not a Tier 1. UUNET and Sprint don't pay for peering, they are both Tier 1.

I found a list a while back that I posted here, but the generally accepted list of top Tier 1 providers are (in no particular order):

1. UUNET
2. Sprint
3. AT&T
4. Genuity
5. Cable & Wireless
6. Qwest

Here's a bit bigger list

AT&T
Bell Atlantic
BellSouth
Cable and Wireless
Global One
GTE
IBM
MCI
Pacific Bell
QUEST
Sprint
US West

Originally posted by zupanm
Here's a bit bigger list
AT&T
Bell Atlantic
BellSouth
Cable and Wireless
Global One
GTE
IBM
MCI
Pacific Bell
QUEST
Sprint
US West

I think you could take issue with some of these:

Bell Atlantic and GTE are the same company, when they merged, the GTE backbone, formerly BBN, was spun off as a separate company: Genuity. The Bell Atlantic bacbone is regional, you can't have a Tier 1 backbone that is regional.

BellSouth and Pacific Bell also have regional backbones.

Quest and US West merged, to form Qwest.

The MCI backbone was sold to C&W when MCI merged with WorldCom.

I don't think IBM has any backbone to speak of...so I don't think they should be included on this list. Global One is now Equant (http://www.equant.com). I am not sure what their backbone is like, I have not seen them listed in any top 10 backbone lists I have looked at, but they may be fine.


Another source of information is Keynote systems, they publish an Internet Health Report of what they consider to be the top 8 backbones. Since their business depends on this information, I would say it is pretty reliable:

http://www.internetpulse.net/

>Quest and US West merged, to form Qwest.

Rephrased it means: Qwest bought US West to remain Qwest :)

Originally posted by Mirco
>Quest and US West merged, to form Qwest.

Rephrased it means: Qwest bought US West to remain Qwest :)

Um yea, damned spell checker must be broken again :). Good catch, on my faulty history :).

Ok, what about the merits of a Tier 1 network? Do they always equate to faster than say Tier 2?

BTW, does anyone know where Verio stands in the bandwidth foodchain?

no mention of Above.net?
and,... last i check Level3 owned a f#$k load of fiber. if they arent tier-1 then neither are qwest or C&W etc etc...

Originally posted by jambler
no mention of Above.net?
and,... last i check Level3 owned a f#$k load of fiber. if they arent tier-1 then neither are qwest or C&W etc etc...

Haha yeah no ****. Level3 has connectivity overseas as well as here in the usa with tons of peering. They are considered a true tier1. Verio would be a tier1 also.

What about Ardent Communications?

Originally posted by GeorgeC
Perhaps this is a stupied question, but anyone care to explain to me just what Tier 1 bandwidth is, and a good list of such providers? My understanding is that they're somehow better in quality, more expensive, and one such provider being Verio.

Thanks,

Being a "tier 1" provider or rather, one who claims to be is nothing more than marketing garbage for people who are too lazy or too uninterested in doing technical due dilligence.

Originally posted by jambler
no mention of Above.net?
and,... last i check Level3 owned a f#$k load of fiber. if they arent tier-1 then neither are qwest or C&W etc etc...

Above.net is not a tier 1 provider. They are primarily a data center provider. MFN, which owns Above.net is a different story, and, to be honest, I am not sure whether they would be considered a Tier 1.

Level 3 is certainly a Tier 1. I didn't say my list was all inclusive, I just listed the largest providers (in terms of traffic). Level 3 has a very small percentage of total backbone traffic -- which is one of the reasons they are in so much trouble :).

Originally posted by ToastyX
What about Ardent Communications?

Ardent communications is in a lot of trouble right now. First as CAIS, and now Ardent they have switched their business plan so many times they made me dizzy :). I don't think they are considered Tier 1, because they have always paid for peering or peered only at the MAEs/PAIX.

Originally posted by manmythlgnd


Being a "tier 1" provider or rather, one who claims to be is nothing more than marketing garbage for people who are too lazy or too uninterested in doing technical due dilligence.


That is simply not true. A Tier 1 provider has a very salient technical advantage over other providers: Data gets into and out of your location using the fastest route possible.

A Tier 2 provider cannot offer the same level of service as a Tier 1 provider, because they do not have as much control over the flow of data off their backbone as a Tier 1 provider.

Originally posted by uuallan



That is simply not true. A Tier 1 provider has a very salient technical advantage over other providers: Data gets into and out of your location using the fastest route possible.

A Tier 2 provider cannot offer the same level of service as a Tier 1 provider, because they do not have as much control over the flow of data off their backbone as a Tier 1 provider.

Without a doubt, being transit-free is a technical advantage. You're preaching to the choir. However, in these times, as I implied, in marketingland they tend to use the "big backbone" definition, which in turn has made this term useless to anyone who does not care to do their own technical due dilligence. How many ghetto hosting providers hosted at exodus or abovenet in the past tried to push off the exodus or abovenet network map as their own?

So, I stand by my point. It's marketing garbage. Unless you're buying from one of the big boys and you know you're getting transit-free bandwidth, you better do your DD.

Originally posted by manmythlgnd

So, I stand by my point. It's marketing garbage. Unless you're buying from one of the big boys and you know you're getting transit-free bandwidth, you better do your DD.

Ahh...my apologies, I misunderstood your post. I completely agree with your statement then :).

what is the cost per Mbps for tier 1 bandwidth.

I use about 2.5 Mbps sustained per day and burst up to 4.5Mbps.

What is a resonable fee for this bandwidth? - Thanks

Originally posted by uuallan


Ardent communications is in a lot of trouble right now. First as CAIS, and now Ardent they have switched their business plan so many times they made me dizzy :). I don't think they are considered Tier 1, because they have always paid for peering or peered only at the MAEs/PAIX.

First, I am an Ardent customer and partner with them. So, I have to jump in here and say something on their behalf. ;-)

Yes, they have been in trouble, they, like many other company's during the "bubble" jumped into wayyy to many businesses, DSL, hotel, kiosk, etc. Hell, even the big guys are in trouble, QWEST, Level3, Williams, WorldCom, and we know what happened to Global Crossing already, etc.

They filed for chap 11 protection to assist in getting rid of these unprofitable portions of their business.

Ardent is doing the right things now, they are focusing on a few areas instead of trying to be the Wal-Mart of service providers.

Anyhow, about them being a Tier 1. Probably not, according to the rules listed here. BUT, they have peering with just about anyone who is anybody or worth peering with, both public and private peering. They have an OC48 network in the No. VA area and OC3/12 nationwide.

Note to self on marketing plan: Hmm, me wonders if I could turn this into the typical "we have over 20 diverse connections blah blah blah...." we can say "We have over 100 connections, to get your data there in 1 hop blah blah blah" Would I be stretching the truth? :-)

My customers (and me) are extremely happy with the bandwidth, and easily can maintain 3MBs to other worthwhile providers.

Uptime from them has been 100% since I've been with them. Of couse, I just jinxed this I'm sure! :)

tjk

Perhaps Cogent will be able to be considered Tier 1 after they complete the purchase of PSINet... but right now, they buy most of their transit from AboveNet and Sprint, so they definately are not Tier 1.