Verizon Public Policy on Netflix
josmon at rigozsaurus.com
Sat Jul 12 06:28:29 UTC 2014
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 09:50:22AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I'm always surprised that folks at smaller exchanges don't form
> consortiums to build a mutually beneficial transit AS that connects to
> a larger remote exchange.
In my experience, the price of buying transit from established players
has always been close to the combined price of buying a circuit and
establishing some form of presence at a remote exchange. Close enough
that everyone was willing to just pay for transit without the added
administrative overhead of the transit consortium.
I've seen such transit consortiums that pretend to be exchange points
as well -- but that's a slightly different beast.
I've also seen where the folks that should peer don't because they all
have mutual transit providers, and the cost of interconnection is higher
than the incremental transit costs for their cross-ASN traffic.
You can't argue "increased route splay" when the circuit costs
dominate the equation.
Internet in the hinterlands is a tough ride compared to fiber-rich
areas... But it keeps getting better, so there is hope.
More information about the NANOG