Peering versus Transit

Mon Sep 30 08:01:14 UTC 1996

> > Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 23:11:57 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: Nathan Stratton <nathan at netrail.net>
> > 
> > Yes, but can we agree that dumping data to someons router at a NAP
> > without asking is steeling?
> 
> Is it really the case that people with routers at exchange points actually
> consider a packet addressed to one of their own customers to be theft of
> service? 

Ur yes, this is theft. Take Alans scenario again:

A = small provider
B = Top tier provider (MCI / Sprint etc.)
C = A's transit provider !=B

Now magnify this on an international scale so you the costs involved
are scaled to a point where they are obvious.

Let's say B sells transit in London as well as in Washington. Both
A and C have invested in international lines to the US ( DS3 = $8/yr ).
A & B are at at the same IX in London. A's transit is going to cost
lots and lots over in the UK. Dumping traffic on B means they don't
have to pay C so much, and use B's international line.

> And of course, to be in a position to "dump data" on a router at an
> exchange, one must have one's own router there peering with *somebody*,
> right? 

You needn't peer with anyone

ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 w.x.y.z

will do the trick nicely if you aren't carrying full routing.

Alex Bligh
Xara Networks