[147590] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: local_preference for transit traffic?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeff Wheeler)
Thu Dec 15 02:36:50 2011
In-Reply-To: <CABO8Q6RoUu-au6a5nYx4ZygrpS_r=RsxDU+7hew3BXkLY7KXsw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 02:35:55 -0500
From: Jeff Wheeler <jsw@inconcepts.biz>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Keegan Holley
<keegan.holley@sungard.com> wrote:
> I always assumed that taking in more traffic was a bad thing.=A0 I've hea=
rd
> about one sided peering agreements where one side is sending more traffic
> than the other needs them to transport. Am I missing something?=A0 Would =
this
> cause a shift in their favor allowing them to offload more customer traff=
ic
> to their peers without complaint?
Well, if Level3 wanted less ingress traffic, they would probably stop
this practice. I would imagine they thought about it carefully.
--=20
Jeff S Wheeler <jsw@inconcepts.biz>
Sr Network Operator=A0 /=A0 Innovative Network Concepts
