[125017] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Peering Exchange Configurations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Thu Apr 8 14:26:59 2010
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <4C54F0C3-6D41-4EF2-BDD8-4E6E92470B9F@delong.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 14:23:58 -0400
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 8, 2010, at 2:08 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> 3a) If no: Do participants typically preference exchange-learned =20=
>> routes over other sources?
>>=20
>> Yes. As far as I know all our members set routes learned through the
>> exchange fabric higher than anything else. That's kind of the point =
as
>> exchange traffic is free so you always want to use it first.
>>=20
> Actually, the order of preference is usually:
Where 'usually' here is rather nebulous.
I am not trying to say Owen is wrong, just don't think the way any =
network uses interconnectivity is somehow standard. Every network is =
different, and even similar links in the same network are different.
IXPs are standard ('usually' :), networks are not.
--=20
TTFN,
patrick
> 1. Private Interconnects (direct private peering)
> 2. Non-metered paid peering/transit
> 3. Exchange Points
> 4. Metered paid peering/transit
>=20
> Owen
>=20
