CDNs should pay eyeball networks, too.

Tue May 1 19:17:09 UTC 2012

In a message written on Tue, May 01, 2012 at 08:23:07PM +0200, Dominik Bay wrote:
> "Feeding" via some bigger peer networks oder classic transit

You have made the assumption that their choice is peering with your
network or sending it out transit.  They may in fact peer with your
upstream.

That makes their choice peer with you, or peer with your upstream.
Peering with your upstream may allow them to reach many people like
you for cost of managing only a single peering session, as compared
to maintaining a few dozen.

Also, many networks have minimum volume amounts for peering
relationships.  They may be able to get settlement free peering
with your upstream by having some minimum traffic level that they
would not have if they peer with some of the individual customers
behind that upstream.  Peering with you may drop them below the
threshold, causing them to pay for transit on 10's of Gigs of
traffic.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 826 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20120501/2e3e8d12/attachment.sig>