North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: BigISP<-->SmallISP peerings

  • From: Robert Laughlin
  • Date: Sat Oct 26 16:24:38 1996

I am trying to feel sorry for the poor burdened Large ISP.....:)

If it was just a matter of money, I would expect the large ISPs could add 
to their revenue streams by offering peering at a price to those networks 
they would otherwise not peer with.  We have all heard that they are 
deluged by requests, right? Maybe there are not enoungh networks 
interested in such a service to make it worthwhile.   Wait a 
minute here, I thought they were overwelmed by requests....

Personally I question this idea of being deluged, after all there are only
a small number of networks at MAE-East which I believe has more IPs than
any other connection point. And the big guys *are* peered with many of 
the networks connected there, so there are only a dozen or so left to 
peer with.  Maybe there is some kind of new math working here.

And BTW, I have not found a single large ISP willing to sell bi-lateral 
peering to me and I *have* asked for price quotes on this.

Best Regards,
Robert Laughlin

DataXchange                sales:  800-863-1550  
       Network Operations Center:  703-903-7412 -or- 888-903-7412

On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Vadim Antonov wrote:

> Zachary DeAquila <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Hrm.  Does it matter if the small ISP already has transit with someone else?
> >In such a case, peering does nothing but shorten the path from SmallISP to
> >BigISP in order to no longer make it go through SmallISPs transit provider.
> Yes, but then from the point of view of large ISP the peering is of zero
> value.  You see, it has to deliver packets to IXP anyway.  OTOH, the
> load on routers, bloated configurations and engineering resources to
> support the additional peering are quite real.
> --vadim
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -