Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers

Blake Dunlap ikiris at gmail.com
Tue Aug 27 21:22:31 UTC 2013

If you don't have secondary connectivity, then I don't suggest going with a
Teir 1. Using a peer-only as a transit link is not something I would
recommend in general unless you know what you are doing in that regard, and
have designed around the inevitable peering issues related to that decision.


On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Eric Louie <elouie at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I'm thinking that same thing, although after researching, the "de-peering
> King" is probably not a contender as one of our primary upstream
> connection.
> (And I don't have secondary or tertiary connections)
> much appreciated,
> Eric Louie
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 2:03 PM
> To: Eric Louie
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 13:45:34 -0700, "Eric Louie" said:
> > That's a good point with the Tier 2 providers.  So that begs the
> > question, why wouldn't I just get my upstream from a Tier 2?  (Because
> > my management is under the perception that we're better off with Tier
> > 1 providers, but that doesn't mean their perception is accurate)
> The good thing about your upstream being a Tier 2 is that it usually means
> that if somebody's baking a peering cake, you're not one of the AS's that's
> suffering.
> Hmmm... if you're going for a connection to a Tier 1, maybe "peering cakes
> per decade" is a valid criterion?

More information about the NANOG mailing list