IX in France

Jared Mauch jared at puck.nether.net
Thu Feb 23 18:00:51 UTC 2012

On Feb 23, 2012, at 12:39 PM, virendra rode wrote:

> I understand this is not true peering relationship, however its an
> interesting way to obtain exchange point routes and I understand this is
> nothing new.


I've found people who use the term 'peering' to mean something different than what I personally interpret it to mean.

eg: "We have peering with 4 carriers at our colocation facility where you can place gear"

Translation: We have blended IP transit from 4 carriers, or you can directly connect to them as needed.

I understand why they call it this, because "I configured peering with Level3/Cogent" on my router, etc.  The difference is in the policy.  What you're speaking of is someone selling transit, which is perfectly fine over various IXes, you generally are prohibited from 'selling next-hop', i.e.: you have to bear the cost on the IX port of the forwarding.


Buying transit isn't as dirty as people think it is, sometimes its the right business decision.  If you connect to an IX for $4000/mo at gig-e, you might as well buy transit at $4/meg on that same port IMHO.  You're unlikely to be using the port at 100% anyways at the IX, so your cost-per-meg there needs to properly reflect your 95% or whatnot.

- Jared

More information about the NANOG mailing list