Internet Traffic Shifting Away From Tier-1 Carriers

carusoj writes 'The way traffic moves over the Internet has changed radically in the last five years. Arbor Networks next week will present the results of a two-year study, drawing on more than 256 exabytes of Internet traffic data, which found that the bulk of international Internet traffic no longer moves across Tier-1 transit providers. Instead, the traffic is handled directly by large content providers, content delivery networks, and consumer networks, and is handed off from one of these to another. You can probably guess what some of these companies are: Google, Microsoft, Facebook. Arbor says there are about 30 of these 'hyper giant' companies that generate and consume about 30% of all Internet traffic.' Here is the Arbor Networks press release on the report.

Comments

It's as if...

[bconway]

the Internet really is a series of interconnected networks. And all is right in the world again.

Re:more reason for the FCC's Internet neutrality r

[CannonballHead]

Plea$e u$e a few more $'$ in your po$t, it'$ make$ you $ound much more authoritative...

Out of curiosity, who SHOULD regulate the internet? Also out of curiosity, who hosts the majority of the internet? They're the ones bearing the monetary burden. I suppose some people might think the internet is just sort of "out there," but I hope most on Slashdot understand that the internet boils down to actual physical machines (er, sorry... tubes) which cost money to build and keep running...

Should the FCC? Not necessarily. On the other hand, I sure would rather have the FCC running it than, say, Iran. Or the UK. Or the UN, which can't seem to do anything except tell people what to do anyways - and they don't even do that very well, if you yell loud enough...

Re:more reason for the FCC's Internet neutrality r

[pete6677]

Lets let the UN regulate it instead. There are never any politics in UN matters, no sir.

Re:more reason for the FCC's Internet neutrality r

[Anonymous Coward]

Herpes for sure.

Re:more reason for the FCC's Internet neutrality r

[Red Flayer]

Umm... the FCC net neutrality rules are for ISPs in the US SPARKY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Good freaking grief we are talking about regulations FOR US COMPANIES, OPERATING IN THE US, SUPPLY SERVICES TO CUSTOMERS IN THE US!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How about that for a reason!!!!!

Can you speak up? I'm having trouble hearing you.

RIAA has won!

[Shakrai]

From TFA:

Arbor also notes that Internet applications used to use a more diverse set of application-specific protocols and communication stacks, but that has consolidated as well. Traffic these days is concentrated on a small number of Web and video protocols, while peer-to-peer traffic has nosedived in the past two years.

That leads to one of two conclusions:

1. RIAA has won! Suck on it NewYorkCountryLawyer and all those who doubted that suing your customers was the gateway to success.
2. RIAA overstated the problem in the first place. Nah, couldn't be.....

Re:RIAA has won!

[Anonymous Coward]

The RIAA has not won. Its just that they have not produced anything for a couple years that was worth wasting bandwidth on when I could be downloading lolcats instead.

Re:more reason for the FCC's Internet neutrality r

[GigsVT]

I think I am one of "them", or something.