Having been through protracted sessions of due dilligence, involving an ISP with a large number of peers, and many peering contracts, the general rules about them seem to be... 1) The vast majority of lawyers, especially those who specialize in peering matters (and they are actually a few), regard bilateral peering contracts as useless instruments for purposes of securing or maintaining peering, due to the ever-present cancellation clauses. 2) Some folks, usually those largely unfamiliar with peering, place unusual weight on the presense or absence of BLPAs. This can sometimes include lawyers who are unfamiliar with peering, as they are almost always unaware of the cancellation clauses. 3) Peering contracts are most useful in their addendums and attachments, as a method of establishing agreement about parameters of peering, such as locations, circuit sizes, who is paying for which circuits, etc. This can be useful, as these agreements tend to survive past the employment of those who negotiated them. Otherwise, there can be confusion about the details. The key is, if you are just getting started peering, you will frequently be presented with other folk's peering agreements. Attempting to negotiate terms or wording of the pre-existing BLPAs is both pointless and a waste of time. - Daniel Golding
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Robert Tryce Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 3:00 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Peering Agreements
I have a question on public peering agreements. I have seen some providers using them while others are not. What is the general opinion on peering agreements? Are most peering agreements used mainly for private peering? Also, what are the pros and cons and what kind of protection should I expect from such an agreement?
Thank you in advance,
Robert Tryce