|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org To: nanog@nanog.org From: Max Tulyev <maxtul@netassist.ua> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 13:11:46 +0300 In-Reply-To: <3F27E66E-6A0C-490D-A44F-AE99315F623C@puck.nether.net> Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org If you dig into hijacking topic more, you will see that hijacks through Tier1 is same or even more popular than through IXes. And if someone want to make me a transit offer for the price of DE-CIX (I do not even ask the price of DTEL-IX peering ;) ) - please, contact me off-list, I will be really happy. On 24.05.16 11:03, Jared Mauch wrote: > >> On May 16, 2016, at 4:29 PM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Router ports are expensive, so even if cross connects were free, you would >> still use the public switch fabric until you reach a traffic level that >> justifies a direct connection. The point of having a IX switch is that you >> can connect to many others with just one single router port. >> > > > The cost of an IX can be quite expensive actually. If you look at the RIPE > presentations from this week, there are stealth routing hijacks that come from > promiscuous peering as well as just the flat economics of connecting with a 10GE > or 100GE interface and the cost per gigabit you assign to the IX port. These > are flat rate ports, unlike transit that may offer you a price and commit rates > that allow you to reach everyone vs those just at the IX. > > I’m hoping I don’t get in trouble for sharing this, but this collaboration exists > for europe on peering costs which are normalized in euro cents per megabit. > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18ztPX_ysWYqEhJlf2SKQQsTNRbkwoxPSfaC6ScEZAG8/edit#gid=0 > > - Jared >
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |