DNS pulling BGP routes?

Jay Hennigan jay at west.net
Sat Oct 16 19:02:52 UTC 2021

On 10/16/21 06:48, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> Jay Hennigan wrote:
>> Access/retail ISPs should want to peer with CDNs as it greatly 
>> reduces their transport costs.
> Not at all.
> Access/retail ISPs have no problem by peering with neutral backbone
> providers.

Neutral backbone providers don't peer with access/retail ISPs. They sell 
transit to them.

> CDN provided backbone only reduces costs of other backbone providers
> without reducing costs of access/retail ISPs.

Access/retail ISPs that peer with CDNs eliminate the cost of paying for 
transit for the content delivered by the CDN. That's what the initials 
CDN stand for.

Access/retail ISPs that peer with CDNs don't reduce the costs of 
backbone providers, they reduce their profits. Those backbone providers 
no longer are charging to deliver the content provided by the CDNs. The 
retail/access ISPs are getting it direct at no charge from the CDN by 
peering. It also reduces the cost to the content provider as they no 
longer are paying a transit provider to deliver it. It also often 
increases the reliability of the Internet experience by creating a more 
direct path.

> Worse, peering beyond neutral providers costs more for access/retail
> providers.

I think you are mistaken. Every gigabyte delivered by peering is a 
gigabyte that the access/retail ISP isn't paying a transit provider to 

Jay Hennigan - jay at west.net
Network Engineering - CCIE #7880
503 897-8550 - WB6RDV

More information about the NANOG mailing list