[152496] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CDNs should pay eyeball networks, too.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Noble)
Tue May 1 13:08:10 2012
From: Steven Noble <snoble@sonn.com>
In-Reply-To: <A6E26D92FF58FD4EBFE18A27C0780F99023711AE@EXCH-DTM-01.ops.rrbone.net>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 10:07:31 -0700
To: Dominik Bay <db@rrbone.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On May 1, 2012, at 9:39 AM, Dominik Bay wrote:
> Yesterday I received the following mail, from a CDN:
>=20
**snip**
> 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 Networks will terminate the peering sessions on that day, with =
this letter serving as 30 day notice.
>=20
>=20
> Sincerely,
While I can understand having some peering requirements, the goal of any =
CDN should be to have the best reach possible. Without knowing if this =
is PI peering or just across a IX it is hard to judge what their (or =
your) costs are. If it is IX it would seem irrational to cut off =
someone who you are doing meaningful traffic with.
> ----8<----
> In this particular case I'm talking about >=3D600Mbps of traffic send =
out by Limelight to "my" eyeballs, not mentioning their fairly small =
footprint in Germany in comparison to other CDNs.
>=20
600Mbps would appear to be meaningful traffic. Without the other side =
of the story it's hard to get a full grip on the situation. It is =
always possible that these are business (not network) decisions where =
there is a certain level of income expected from a division.
> These points aside, we are talking about a Content *Delivery* Network =
here. There are CDNs out there who burn to improve their customer =
experience (both the content creators and the content receiver) at high =
cost.
> 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.
I do agree here, again on an IX level. They still have the choice to =
backhaul to you or hot potato your traffic wherever they feel like it. =
=46rom the data you have provide it appears to be a lose-lose situation =
to de-peer you.
>=20
> At the end of the day I'm going to charge CDNs who want to deliver =
their customers content to my eyeballs and make me pay (about 2USD per =
Mbps, with a minimum of 1Gbps).
>=20
That may be what they are doing "if at all possible try to monetize it".
