You might also want to consider that Wikipedia is, on balance, a large net source of network traffic, and that peering agreements make most sense for networks which have balanced traffic in and out (and, for the same reason, transit gets cheaper for balanced flows, even if you cannot negotiate settlement-free peering). Thus, network providers with net inflows may well be able to make substantial cost _savings_ by giving Wikipedia free bandwidth, power and rackspace. Wikipedia is rapidly becoming big enough to become a player in the peering game, or at least should be aware of its advantage to others in doing so. I presume this has not escaped the attention of some of our potential benefactors... -- Neil _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

You might also want to consider that Wikipedia is, on balance, a large net source of network traffic, and that peering agreements make most sense for networks which have balanced traffic in and out (and, for the same reason, transit gets cheaper for balanced flows, even if you cannot negotiate settlement-free peering). Thus, network providers with net inflows may well be able to make substantial cost _savings_ by giving Wikipedia free bandwidth, power and rackspace. Wikipedia is rapidly becoming big enough to become a player in the peering game, or at least should be aware of its advantage to others in doing so. I presume this has not escaped the attention of some of our potential benefactors... -- Neil

Georg Chytil wrote: Hoi, The Dutch and the Belgian organisations are both in the Gigabit range. Yahoo and this other "mystery" organisation are in that bracket as well. Thanks, GerardM