On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM, Jason Lixfeld <jason@lixfeld.ca> wrote:
On 2011-12-12, at 4:22 PM, Simon Lockhart <simon@slimey.org> wrote:
I guess most (i.e. those which aren't Akamai) are more concerned with making money than with delivering a good service to the end user.
Really? I always thought that higher profits and buying transit were mutually exclusive relative to higher profits and openly peering.
So what you are saying is that one stands to make more by paying upstreams for bit swapping? How's that work?
If the argument is that the opex required for maintaining peering relationships is too expensive relative to the direct and indirect cost of buying bandwidth, I love to be edumacated on how that math actually works because it makes absolutely no sense to me.
I'm somewhat assuming you're trolling here. :/ but just in case... the lost revenue from peering with someone when you could be charging them transit prices is the tradeoff being referred to here; Level3 isn't in the business of paying upstreams for bandwidth. (well, other than comcast, but that's a different thread entirely. And yes, I suppose that would be me trolling. Bad Matt!) Matt