[101929] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Lessons from the AU model
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adrian Chadd)
Sun Jan 20 21:24:22 2008
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:12:47 +0900
From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@creative.net.au>
To: Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <2455D9AF-00F2-4C05-9B54-899AF27967A9@nosignal.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Mon, Jan 21, 2008, Andy Davidson wrote:
> >Peering in Oz is MLPA. This leads to no one worrying about having
> >to be found to form peering relationships, so peeringdb is
> >incomplete at best. I've tried to encourage people to add their
> >data in.
>
> Is it always compulsory ? (I just did some legwork and read the WAIX
> policies, and it seems to be mandatory here) This surprises me,
> Multi-lateral peering is great for lots of networks, but really bad
> for others, and (if forced) probably acts as a barrier to the bigger
> networks from taking part in any public peering ....
Early on, the large providers still wouldn't peer. These MLPA IX'es
were formed primarily for small providers to dodge >$2000 a megabit
a month transit costs.
These days, the small-now-large providers MLPA'ing at the local IX
are starting to discover why MLPA is great for little players but
financially silly for larger ones. That said, peering at a state
IX doesn't preclude you from peering with one of the telco's (as
far as I gather - I've been out of this industry for quite a while!)
and for the sake of the growth of IP in Australia I'd like to see
the bulk of peering still be MLPA. Cracking a bilateral peering
nut in Australia would be .. funny to watch.
> >1/3 from (expensive) transit to the "Gang of Four) who won't peer
>
> .... and acts as an incentive to pull out of the agreement as networks
> grow .. think about what happens when your customers' routes start
> appearing through your MLP session as well.
Then you make absolutely sure you only announce your local routes
to each local MLP IX. If you announce your entire network to it then
you should know what you're doing. :) A few WAIX participants do that
as the cost of hauling it over their WAN links between capital cities
is smaller than farming it off via transit (I'm guessing.)
> I can think of some MLP-only exchanges in Europe, but I can't think of
> any that do significant traffic.
Completely different scale of things :) And you'll find people who run
(mostly) open peering policies there too.
Adrian
