Sprint peering policy

Mon Jul 1 21:52:04 UTC 2002

>From: dre <andre at operations.net>
>
>
>You might be able to sit in a colo and buy some cheap transit from one
>provider (especially if the colo isn't carrier neutral).  However, if you
>want diversity in your upstreams, peering quickly becomes a reality.

If you have to buy an OC48 (or dark fiber) from your CO to PAIX/PE, then 
where is your single point of failure?  What help does having redundany 
peers (which are not redundant anyways) at the same peering facility if you 
can't get to it?  I think I would much rather have two circuits to two 
different transit providers for the same money.

Also, unless you actually have all your CO equipment at the PE facilities, 
you will still have to have a CO (co-located or not) from which to serve 
your customers in that market.  I don't know what PAIX charges for this 
ability, or if they even allow it, but...  It seems that this would get real 
expensive real fast.

Now, for joe-blow ISP, maybe it's a good deal to be there.  But he probably 
doesn't meet the peering requirements for larger players anyways.  I don't 
believe in free-for-all peering.  Who would you sell to if you peered with 
everyone?

>You have to look at all the advantages/disadvantages for your organization.

Of course.  As I have already stated, I'm not against peering.  Actaully, I 
am all for it.  It is just that I am for it for different reasons than 
others may be.  I don't believe that it's a great cost saveings today.  
Maybe in a year, things will change again, and we will all start making a 
profit off bandwidth.  Maybe 90% of the companies will be gone, and we'll be 
back to where we were 10 years ago.  Who knows?

>People have in the past and will continue in the future to use peering to
>lower costs for their networks.

This is a foolhearty reason to do this.  If you are only looking at the 
financial benefit, you are opening yourself up to a whole can of worms.  If 
you are peered with everyone, and it is costing you $x a meg to get off your 
network, then you should cancel all peering the minute it is seen that it 
will cost $x-1 for transit.  I seriously doubt that this was the main reason 
why peering was started anyways.

>how long can providers sell transit at $50/meg?

Indeed.  I hope that it isn't that long, but when you are only charging $3- 
to $50 a meg to your cable-modem/DSL subscriber, what profit are you making 
be paying more than that?

>If you want to talk about advantages of transit vs. peering

I think everyone knows the technical advantages and disadvantages of both 
peering and transit.  I don't think it really has anything to do with this 
discussion.  This discussion is more to do with that is cheaper at this 
time, peering or transit?  Maybe I completely missed the boat on this one, 
but if we are talking about regulation so someone doesn't get cheated...  We 
are talking about money.

And since I brought it up, I'm not particularly interested in governmental 
regulation either.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com