On Tue, 5 Jun 2001, E.B. Dreger wrote:
From: Christian Nielsen <cnielsen@nielsen.net> BTW, to solve these types of problems, Smaller companies need to band together and start peering with each other in the local metro area.
Hear hear. The local exchanges that are not corrupted by their sponsors' "upsell" agenda have somehow sustained themselves, because they solve a problem for their participants. Local exchanges (regional exchange points, community internet exchanges) are becoming more critical parts of the infrastructure. With the convergence of the metro network (look at the growth rate of investment in the metro network compared to the national network--that's not just for national-network connectivity), voice moving onto data networks (80% of voice traffic stays within the local exchange) and the migration of new applications to the Internet making the Internet Matter, traffic within the metro area will become a significant, if not dominant, segment of the overall traffic.
Until the smaller companies get bought out by a national provider who has no interest in peering.
Quite frankly, it seems that most smaller companies have no clue what the heck peering is or why it's good. I've approached a few, and none seem to get it.
I've talked to a lot of companies about a lot of different kinds of technology. I found that if you find a problem they have that they really care about, or that you can educate them to care about, typically they will appreciate the value of the solution, and be motivated to get it. Talking to a small company about peering (which they would be unlikely to know about, since I was probably the first to approach them) resulted in blank stares and a quick dismissal. Talking to a company about saving money on their transit, improving performance and reliability, diversifying routing paths, adding value to their customers, differentiating themselves from competition, and doing so in a manner catered to their skill-set, resulted in most companies at least acknowledging that the solution (peering) was right for them, and many of them moving forward. Fitting it into their business and financial models was a different hurdle, but much more easily overcome when they were helping. As you might suspect, there are different methods to sell to the networking guy vs. the business manager. Since the networking guy rarely has a company check-book, I found the most effective approach was to convince both of them, or at a minimum the business guy.
One (cable company, mind you) wanted to *charge more for peering than for transit*. They thought that we would be getting some sort of "priority access" to their network, and wanted to charge a hefty price... and this was talking to a net admin, not a droid. Jeez.
This doesn't seem too far off from the state of peering in general today. Isn't that what ratios and traffic levels and geography policies are all about, enforcing that peers are somehow "equal" and deserve to share traffic freely, and the rest of us can pay for "priority access"? Pete. pete@commix.org [ Support your neighborhood and community network projects. ] [ Create a community Internet exchange. Ask me how. ]