Leaving public peering?

Jack Bates jbates at brightok.net
Wed Dec 2 16:26:22 CST 2009


Leo Bicknell wrote:
> rate, and that helps offset some of the costs.  I've oversimplified, and
> it's a very complex problem for most providers; however I know many are
> looking at the fees for peering ports go from being in the noise to a
> huge part of their cost structure and that doesn't work.
> 

Let's also not forget those who aren't sitting right next to the 
exchange. I'd love to have better peering, private and public, but 
there's the additional 300 miles of long haul to consider as well.

Then there's the consideration of redundancy. Do I want redundant feeds 
to the exchange or do I want to consider my local transits to be the 
redundancy. Will I be purchasing transit via the exchange link to 
perform redundant functions for my local transits?

It's always a difficult financial decision, and I've been battling it 
for years. I want the option for more direct connectivity and more 
peering options, but there's additional costs which are hard to justify 
to the bean counters.

Jack (still no dual stacked IPv6 transit due to same issues as above)




More information about the NANOG mailing list