Question about peering

Robert E. Seastrom rs at
Sat Apr 7 17:16:30 CDT 2012

Actually, Suresh, I disagree.  It depends on the
facility/country/continent, the cost of joining the local IX fabric at
a reasonable bandwidth, your cost model, and your transit costs.  In
short, it's not 1999 anymore, and peering is not automatically the
right answer from a purely fiscal perspective (though it may be from a
technical perspective; see below).

At certain IXes that have a perfect storm of high priced ports and a
good assortment of carriers with sufficiently high quality service and
aggressive pricing, a good negotiator can fairly easily find himself
in a position where the actual cost per megabit of traffic moved on
peered bandwidth exceeds the cost of traffic moved on transit _by an
order of magnitude_.  That's without even factoring in the (low)
maintenance cost of having a bunch of BGP sessions around or upgraded
routers or whatever.

Sometimes making the AS path as short as possible makes a lot of sense
(e.g. when trying to get an anycast network to do the right thing),
but assumptions that peering results in lower costs are less true
every day.


Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists at> writes:

> what does it cost you to peer, versus what does it cost you to not peer?
> if you are at the same ix the costs of peering are very low indeed
> On Saturday, April 7, 2012, Anurag Bhatia wrote:
>> Hello everyone
>> 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?
>> Thanks.
>> --
>> Anurag Bhatia
>> or simply - http://[2001:470:26:78f::5] if you are on IPv6 connected
>> network!
>> Twitter: @anurag_bhatia <!/anurag_bhatia>
>> Linkedin:
> -- 
> Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists at

More information about the NANOG mailing list