[152489] in North American Network Operators' Group
CDNs should pay eyeball networks, too.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dominik Bay)
Tue May 1 12:39:47 2012
From: Dominik Bay <db@rrbone.net>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 16:39:34 +0000
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Yesterday I received the following mail, from a CDN:=0A=
=0A=
---->8----=0A=
Greetings,=0A=
=0A=
Limelight Networks periodically reviews its interconnection strategy to ens=
ure the quality and integrity of its interconnection between all its partne=
rs. We have recently updated our requirements for settlement-free peering w=
hich are posted at http://www.as22822.net/=0A=
=0A=
This letter is to notify you that yyy no longer meets our minimum requireme=
nts. If yyy would like to maintain our current interconnectivity, there wil=
l be settlement associated with doing so. If you are interested in pursuing=
this option, please reply back to this email indicating such.=0A=
=0A=
Should your company decline this option, or if we do not have an agreement =
regarding the settlement in place prior to May 31st 2012, Limelight Network=
s will terminate the peering sessions on that day, with this letter serving=
as 30 day notice.=0A=
=0A=
=0A=
Sincerely,=0A=
----8<----=0A=
=0A=
The same mail was sent out last year, about end of April 2011, to another I=
SP I'm working with.=0A=
They got depeered, but the ISP which received the mail above yesterday didn=
't meet the requirements last year either.=0A=
I totally understand that some companies might not be able to handle sub-5M=
bps peering sessions, be it technical or organisational, but >=3D100Mbps sh=
ould be worth any effort, as long as it improves the network.=0A=
=0A=
In this particular case I'm talking about >=3D600Mbps of traffic send out b=
y Limelight to "my" eyeballs, not mentioning their fairly small footprint i=
n Germany in comparison to other CDNs.=0A=
=0A=
These points aside, we are talking about a Content *Delivery* Network here.=
There are CDNs out there who burn to improve their customer experience (bo=
th the content creators and the content receiver) at high cost.=0A=
Having a Tier1 attitude and telling eyeball networks with <1Gbps of traffic=
exchanged to bugger off or pay is not one of the ways to improve this.=0A=
=0A=
At the end of the day I'm going to charge CDNs who want to deliver their cu=
stomers content to my eyeballs and make me pay (about 2USD per Mbps, with a=
minimum of 1Gbps).=0A=
=0A=
-dominik=0A=
