Any idea why more companies don't offer eBGP peering / multi hop
-----Original Message----- From: Michael McConnell [mailto:michael@winkstreaming.com] Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 7:40 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Multihop eBGP peering or VPN based eBGP peering peering? Its very common for providers to offer single or double hop peering, so why not 5 or 10 hops? In many cases people find it logical to perform single or double hop peering, why is >peering any greater always frowned upon. I understand the logic that you can't control the path beyond a point, however I still see numerous advantages. The norm has always been if you are peering with someone you have router in the location you are peering. Thus, direct connection!!! But I've seen folks do what you are describing but in terms of their own networks thru use of GRE Tunnels. The main point of peering is having better connectivity and dropping traffic directly or closest to its destination.
One obvious advantages one is, imagine you east coast data centre and you had a eBGP peering session with a west coast router, you'd be able to control ingress via the west coast. (aka routing around an region outage that is effecting ingress) For >example during the last hurricane around New Jersey, numerous tier 1's were down towards the atlantic and every peer for the atlantic was effected. One could have just made the ingress via the west coast the logical route.
I do see this advantage being an obvious workable logical one. However, large providers typically have their own network (layers 1-3) coast to coast if were talking USA. But in the case of the hurricane situation many were without power so you can have a router west coast and announce from that router but how will you get traffic back to east coast if that's your data center? You see you can have routers all over but if your data center (CDN) is without power you are done. Otis