peering charges?

Sanjay Dani (maillists) indus at
Mon Jan 27 07:03:28 UTC 1997

> Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:30:12 -0500 (EST)
> From: Nathan Stratton <nathan at>

> Yes, and the current peering requirements are enough to keep most small
> ISPs from growing. I am spending 10s of thousands a month over what I need
> to spend just because people want to see full DS3 network. I can
> understand people would want me to be at all NAPs, but why should I need
> 10X the bandwidth I need for my customers?
> There are also problems with providers saying that I need to be at every
> NAP they are at, but what do I do when say a NAP in the east can't give me
> a connection? They first don't want to let me in at all, then they say

Perhaps I'm cynical or naive or both. It seems to me like
you're working towards a target that the "big" providers
keep moving at their will and at _your_ expense. It
would be interesting to see if you could have actually
saved money by _buying_ just the amount of bandwidth
you currently need from the big provider(s) that matter
most from an engineering standpoint.

Of course I'm ignorant about your long term business
objectives that may justify the infrastructure investment.


Web Professionals, Inc.          
20370 Town Center Lane, Suite 245               +1 408-865-0899
Cupertino CA 95014 USA   

More information about the NANOG mailing list