North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Sprint peering policy
If you have to buy an OC48 (or dark fiber) from your CO to PAIX/PE, then where is your single point of failure? What help does having redundany peers (which are not redundant anyways) at the same peering facility if you can't get to it? I think I would much rather have two circuits to two different transit providers for the same money.From: dre <email@example.com> You might be able to sit in a colo and buy some cheap transit from one provider (especially if the colo isn't carrier neutral). However, if you want diversity in your upstreams, peering quickly becomes a reality.
Also, unless you actually have all your CO equipment at the PE facilities, you will still have to have a CO (co-located or not) from which to serve your customers in that market. I don't know what PAIX charges for this ability, or if they even allow it, but... It seems that this would get real expensive real fast.
Now, for joe-blow ISP, maybe it's a good deal to be there. But he probably doesn't meet the peering requirements for larger players anyways. I don't believe in free-for-all peering. Who would you sell to if you peered with everyone?
Of course. As I have already stated, I'm not against peering. Actaully, I am all for it. It is just that I am for it for different reasons than others may be. I don't believe that it's a great cost saveings today. Maybe in a year, things will change again, and we will all start making a profit off bandwidth. Maybe 90% of the companies will be gone, and we'll be back to where we were 10 years ago. Who knows?You have to look at all the advantages/disadvantages for your organization.
This is a foolhearty reason to do this. If you are only looking at the financial benefit, you are opening yourself up to a whole can of worms. If you are peered with everyone, and it is costing you $x a meg to get off your network, then you should cancel all peering the minute it is seen that it will cost $x-1 for transit. I seriously doubt that this was the main reason why peering was started anyways.People have in the past and will continue in the future to use peering to lower costs for their networks.
Indeed. I hope that it isn't that long, but when you are only charging $3- to $50 a meg to your cable-modem/DSL subscriber, what profit are you making be paying more than that?how long can providers sell transit at $50/meg?
I think everyone knows the technical advantages and disadvantages of both peering and transit. I don't think it really has anything to do with this discussion. This discussion is more to do with that is cheaper at this time, peering or transit? Maybe I completely missed the boat on this one, but if we are talking about regulation so someone doesn't get cheated... We are talking about money.If you want to talk about advantages of transit vs. peering
And since I brought it up, I'm not particularly interested in governmental regulation either.
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com