[183275] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [c-nsp] Peering + Transit Circuits
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Tue Aug 25 07:57:03 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Tim Durack <tdurack@gmail.com>, Scott Granados <scott@granados-llc.net>
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 13:54:21 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAE_ug15tWxr_wE4SnGxoqiTec9brG_xqDLbjzakXy1fqB5aM8A@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>,
"cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net" <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 18/Aug/15 18:02, Tim Durack wrote:
> Can I ask why you terminate peering and transit on different routers? (Not
> suggesting that is bad, just trying to understand the reason.)
Easier policy enforcement for us.
Lowers the chance of you dealing with traffic in ways you don't intend
(although that can always be fixed).
Spreading both commercial and technical risk, depending on whether you
value transit more than peering, or vice versa.
Avoiding kinky things with VRF's.
Mark.
