On Friday, May 16, 2014 08:52:31 PM Christopher Morrow wrote:
is 'symmetric traffic ratios' even relevant though? Peering is about offsetting costs, right? it might not be important that the ratio be 1:1 or 2:1... or even 10:1, if it's going to cost you 20x to get the traffic over longer/transit/etc paths... or if you have to build into some horrific location(s) to access the content in question.
Harping on symmetric ratios seems very 1990... and not particularly germaine to the conversation at hand.
Agree. We don't have a ratio requirement, for example. We have a "if it makes sense" requirement. I'm forced to peer with certain African providers in London and Amsterdam because they don't want to peer in Africa, where we are literally are an x-connect away from each other. And the reasons are not even because either of us is larger or smaller than the other... it's just legacy thinking and we're the new guy that has grown rapidly. Now we both have to pay for traffic to get sent to Europe and back. How nice... Mark.