[152700] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Question about peering
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rob Szarka)
Wed May 9 16:50:32 2012
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 16:50:07 -0400
From: Rob Szarka <szlists@szarka.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAJ0+aXZGJHSnZxoUjHkod3=nAX_ofF5qtbiHBxu8=OvH-J23AA@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 4/6/2012 3:11 PM, Anurag Bhatia wrote:
> I am curious to know how small ISPs plan peering with other interested
> parties. E.g if ISP A is connected to ISP C via big backbone ISP B, and say
> A and C both have open peering policy and assuming the exist in same
> exchange or nearby. Now at this point is there is any "minimum bandwidth"
> considerations? Say if A and C have 1Gbps + of flowing traffic - very
> likely peering would be good idea to save transit costs to B. But if A and
> C have very low levels - does it still makes sense? Does peering costs
> anything if ISPs are in same exchange? Does at low traffic level it makes
> more sense to keep on reaching other ISPs via big transit provider?
One thing to consider is that peering can benefit both networks not just
because of bandwidth savings, but because (given sufficient clue) they
can deliver better performance and reliability to their mutual customers.
