Thanks. I thought it was something factually wrong.

galaxy_gas 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

It is also likely factually wrong as most major ISPs use GGC for popular traffic

After using Deutsche Telekom as an example of how great direct peering is, a few paragraphs later the article uses Deutsche Telekom as an example of the dangers of using peering provider intermediaries.

▲

PhilKunz 2 days ago | parent [-]

Is it the only peering of Starlink though?

▲

marcusb 2 days ago | parent [-]

? My comment had nothing to do with Starlink.

Your first example I was referring to - which you've now edited out of the article[0] to be more generic - stated:

> When Deutsche Telekom customers want to watch YouTube, that traffic flows directly from Google's network to Deutsche Telekom's network at a Frankfurt exchange point—maybe four or five router hops, minimal latency, no intermediaries. It's elegant. It's efficient. And it's exactly what Vodafone is abandoning.

Later:

> Deutsche Telekom pioneered this model in Germany, and the results have been catastrophic for customers. Not "slightly annoying" or "a bit slower"—genuinely, documentably terrible.

0 - original here: https://web.archive.org/web/20251107180616/https://coffee.li...

	▲	PhilKunz 12 hours ago \| parent [-]
		fair enough. I replied to the wrong comment. Sorry for that. coffee.link is getting a git based version feature to make changes more transparent. Also there is a deno (+ electron for GUI version) based testing tool coming to better understand network routes. Additionally I plan to do a well researched series called "How does the internet work".

▲

inemesitaffia 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

SpaceX is both customer and peer of inter.link