I agree, but as a regional player most large players won't peer with us anyway from my discussions with them. Maybe I'm just talking to the wrong people...:-) -----Original Message----- From: Joseph T. Klein [mailto:jtk@titania.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 2:00 PM To: Owens, Shane (EPIK.ORL); nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: OT - Importance of Content Careful. Unbalanced traffic can cause difficulties with peering. The eyeball heavy networks will tend to peer with you but a long list of large (route table) players will not. --On Wednesday, 10 July 2002 13:49 -0400 "Owens, Shane (EPIK.ORL)" <sowens@epik.net> wrote:
I was wondering the importance of content to IP providers. Is it feasible to go after a lot of hosting companies and such as a business model and greatly skew your traffic ratios to hopefully reach a critical mass. I would think at some point you would have so much content that people would start to come to you for peering or to purchase access to get to that content which would cause a reduction in overall transit costs, but what would that critical mass be and how valid is that thought?
Opinions?
Shane Owens
-- Joseph T. Klein jtk@titania.net "Why do you continue to use that old Usenet style signature?" -- anon