<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'>*nods* Two conversations:<div><br></div><div>1) What does tier 1 mean?</div><div>2) Does it matter?</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>1) Varies, based on if you are trying to include yourself in that list or not.</div><div>2) No.<br><br><div><span name="x"></span><br><br>-----<br>Mike Hammett<br>Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>http://www.ics-il.com<br><br>Midwest-IX<br>http://www.midwest-ix.com<span name="x"></span><br></div><br><hr id="zwchr"><div style="color:#000;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;"><b>From: </b>"Tom Beecher" <beecher@beecher.cc><br><b>To: </b>"Rubens Kuhl" <rubensk@gmail.com><br><b>Cc: </b>"Nanog" <nanog@nanog.org><br><b>Sent: </b>Tuesday, August 2, 2022 10:58:58 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: Allegedly Tier 1s in Wikipedia<br><br><div dir="ltr"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">This conventional interpretation is the one I'm applying in this question.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I would argue even the 'conventional' definition of 'Tier 1' has been nebulous for long enough that it doesn't really matter much anymore. </div><div><br></div><div>Who a network connects with and how is all that matters, regardless of what label they want to apply to themselves. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 2:41 PM Rubens Kuhl <<a href="mailto:rubensk@gmail.com" target="_blank">rubensk@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 3:19 PM Geoff Huston <<a href="mailto:gih@apnic.net" target="_blank">gih@apnic.net</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> > On 1 Aug 2022, at 11:10 am, Tom Paseka via NANOG <<a href="mailto:nanog@nanog.org" target="_blank">nanog@nanog.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> ><br>
> > Paying for "peering", doesn't stop you being a tier-1.<br>
> ><br>
> > Being a Tier-1 means you are "transit free" (technical term, not commercial). No one is transiting your routes to other Tier-1 providers.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> There are a lot of potential interpretations of “Tier 1” and often folk use the one that benefits their own classification (obviously!). The one I think corresponds to the conventional interpretation is "I’m a Tier 1 because I have a SKA peering agreement with other Tier 1 networks and I pay no other network for transit or peering”, or more informally, “I’m a Tier 1 because I pay nobody and everyone pays me, except for my peers.”<br>
<br>
This conventional interpretation is the one I'm applying in this question.<br>
<br>
> I suspect that what goes on is “I’m a Tier 1 because I say so, and noone has contradicted me yet!" :-)<br>
<br>
Which is unfortunately what some operators serving my region try<br>
applying. And after being contradicted, they move to "regional Tier-1"<br>
speech, which is something nobody ever defined.<br>
<br>
<br>
Rubens<br>
</blockquote></div>
</div><br></div></div></body></html>