[187629] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: PCH Peering Paper
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Livingood, Jason)
Tue Feb 16 09:49:46 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>
To: Niels Bakker <niels=nanog@bakker.net>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 14:49:41 +0000
In-Reply-To: <20160213015614.GL3097@excession.tpb.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 2/12/16, 8:56 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Niels Bakker"
<nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of niels=3Dnanog@bakker.net> wrote:
>* bedard.phil@gmail.com (Phil Bedard) [Sat 13 Feb 2016, 01:40 CET]:
>>I was going to ask the same thing, since even for settlement free
>>peering between large content providers and eyeball networks there
>>are written agreements in place. I would have no clue on the volume
>>percentage but it's not going to be near 99%.
>
>It's much closer to 99% than to 50%, though.
Any reference on that? I=B9m wondering who (if anyone) is formally measurin=
g
/ tracking this and seeing the exact trend over time.
Thanks
Jason
