DNS pulling BGP routes?

Sun Oct 17 18:22:37 UTC 2021

søn. 17. okt. 2021 11.16 skrev Masataka Ohta <
mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>:

> Jay Hennigan wrote:
>
> >> 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.
>
> FYI, that is called paid peering.
>

Paid peering is not the same product as IP Transit. In general a packet
never traverse two peering links because that would mean the middle man is
not getting paid to move the traffic. Paid peering with a backbone provider
will get you routes from their paying customers but not from their peers.
The same as you would have from a settlement free peering.

> >> 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.
>
> But, it does not mean both parties of the peer are equally
> benefited. As such peering may be paid one, though it
> may not be the current practice.
>
> Given the observed profitability of CDN providers, CDN
> providers are, seemingly, more benefited (because they
> are not neutral), in which case, CDN providers should
> pay to access/retail ISPs.
>
>                                         Masataka Ohta
>

I do not want Netflix to pay me. I get paid by my customers, some of which
also happens to be Netflix customers. If Netflix had to pay me, they would
need to get that money from the same people who are already paying me
directly. What is the point of that?

Let me tell you the point. Large ISP can exploit their domination of the
marked to double dip, which means they want to be paid twice. That happens
to be not neutral and is a way to make the customer pay a hidden fee.

For smaller ISPs it works the other way around. An evil CDN could attempt
to charge us, the small ISP. I am happy that is not happening.

Regards

Baldur
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20211017/faaf3dbd/attachment.html>