[44556] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: a question about the economics of peering
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Hitesh Patel)
Sat Dec 1 11:47:59 2001
Message-ID: <41D348CD8E13D411973100A0CC58AA909A5B29@exchange2.nildram.co.uk>
From: Hitesh Patel <Hitesh@nildram.net>
To: 'Stephane Bortzmeyer' <bortzmeyer@gitoyen.net>,
Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2001 16:47:27 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
This is what exactly I said. Please see my comments.
Regards
Hitesh Patel
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephane Bortzmeyer [mailto:bortzmeyer@gitoyen.net]
Sent: 01 December 2001 13:18
To: Alex Rubenstein
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Subject: Re: a question about the economics of peering
On Friday 30 November 2001, at 11 h 52,
Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net> wrote:
> While speaking with them today, thier engineer and I got into a little bit
> of a disagreement as to why people peer with each other at public exchange
> points.
There is also an important reason to be connected at several exchange
points: reliability. If you just have one transit provider, you're more
vulnerable than with one transit provider plus a variety of peerings, which
will still carry at least part of the traffic if the main provider fails.
