Someone was kind enough to forward me an outline of the peering policy they received from Sprint. It seems to be the toughest one I've seen -
=OC48 in 14 US cities, >=OC12 to Europe. To find out the traffic minimums and ratios it looks like an NDA is required...
Ralph Doncaster principal, IStop.com
Ralph, Two points, here. One is, Sprint won't peer with you. I'm not even sure who you work for, but rest assured, they will not peer with you. Time spent on this might be better utilized reading some of Bill Norton's excellent intro to peering papers, or, if you work for a company that is truly serious about peering, you could hire an experienced peering engineer, to assist you with this. There are several that are currently available. The second point is, whomever you spoke to has violated a non-disclosure agreement, one that is normally taken seriously. I would tread carefully in this area, as it may get whomever you spoke with in a significant amount of trouble. Finally, I'm not sure why anyone would want to actually waste the time on this - there are numerous large tier 2 networks that are starting to get peering initiatives going. If you are large enough, I'm sure they would love to peer with you. Remember - peering that first 50% of your traffic is not that hard, if you have the resources, contacts and knowledge. It's that last bit that hurts. - Daniel Golding
-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Ralph Doncaster Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 1:33 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Sprint peering policy
Someone was kind enough to forward me an outline of the peering policy they received from Sprint. It seems to be the toughest one I've seen -
=OC48 in 14 US cities, >=OC12 to Europe. To find out the traffic minimums and ratios it looks like an NDA is required...
Ralph Doncaster principal, IStop.com
I know Sprint won't peer with anyone small. I said in my inital post I don't stand a chance - but who knows, at the rate OC48 prices are dropping maybe next year I will meet the requirements. Attention K-Mart shoppers, WorldCom OC48's on sale in isle 5. ;-)
The second point is, whomever you spoke to has violated a non-disclosure agreement, one that is normally taken seriously. I would tread carefully in this area, as it may get whomever you spoke with in a significant amount of trouble.
I didn't post this until now since I was waiting for a couple opinions to verify that it was in fact genuine, and as well a public filing that anyone could get if they know where to dig at the FCC. http://ns.istop.com/~ralph/2000-04-13-sprint.pdf -Ralph
RD> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 14:57:59 -0400 (EDT) RD> From: Ralph Doncaster RD> I know Sprint won't peer with anyone small. I said in my RD> inital post I don't stand a chance - but who knows, at the RD> rate OC48 prices are dropping maybe next year I will meet the RD> requirements. Attention K-Mart shoppers, WorldCom OC48's on RD> sale in isle 5. ;-) Or, like Daniel mentioned, you could focus on those where you stand a chance of peering. Note that traffic requirements mean the more you peer with little guys, the harder it will be to peer with their upstreams. Pick a strategy and run with it. Being a broadband provider in SE Canada, I suggest sniffing out public peering in NYC and CHI for a start. IIRC, Hotmail and Y! are at AADS and will peer with most anyone -- there's a good chunk of traffic. Now Akamaize your network if you haven't already. It's fun to talk about infrastructure, but there comes a time where you draw the line, deciding what is real and what isn't... Eddy -- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com> To: blacklist@brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
Pick a strategy and run with it. Being a broadband provider in SE Canada, I suggest sniffing out public peering in NYC and CHI for a start. IIRC, Hotmail and Y! are at AADS and will peer with most anyone -- there's a good chunk of traffic. Now Akamaize your network if you haven't already.
I'm already working on NYC. For Chicago an OC3 connection to AADS would cost more than the long-haul back to Toronto. I also prefer ethernet peering instead of ATM. Equinix looks like the best option in Chicago, but most long-haul carriers are in 600 Federal and not 350 Cermak. As for Akamai, I've found very little of my traffic (<5%) is Akamai. Akamai is at NYIIX anyway, so once I get into 25 Broadway I'd peer with them. -Ralph
RD> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:00:11 -0400 (EDT) RD> From: Ralph Doncaster RD> For Chicago an OC3 connection to AADS would cost more than RD> the long-haul back to Toronto. Given as an example. However the cost/benefit plays out... RD> I also prefer ethernet peering instead of ATM. Agreed. RD> Equinix looks like the best option in Chicago, but most RD> long-haul carriers are in 600 Federal and not 350 Cermak. For now, anyway. RD> As for Akamai, I've found very little of my traffic (<5%) is RD> Akamai. Interesting. If you don't mind me asking, what is your total traffic level, and how did you determine 5%? Eddy -- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com> To: blacklist@brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
I'm already working on NYC. For Chicago an OC3 connection to AADS would cost more than the long-haul back to Toronto.
Interestingly, it's arguable that once you pay for the OC3 (let's say $5k, for sake of arguement) and the AADS port (another $5k), you're at $64/meg, and thats assuming a 95th utilization of 155. Assuming a more real world utilization of 120 mb/s, at best, you're at $83/meg, somewhat more expensive than what several providers are selling at these days. -- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex@nac.net, latency, Al Reuben -- -- Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net --
AR> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 20:53:44 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) AR> From: Alex Rubenstein AR> Assuming a more real world utilization of 120 mb/s, at best, At very best. ATM cell tax in mind, I'd expect lower. I just checked Last-Modified on AADS' pricing page, and it looks like it was modified within two months of today. Assuming that prices are as current as the page "starting at $4700/mo" is indeed steep. That same money buys a half rack and a ton of cross-connects at Equinix... Eddy -- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com> To: blacklist@brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
On Fri, 28 Jun 2002, E.B. Dreger wrote:
I just checked Last-Modified on AADS' pricing page, and it looks like it was modified within two months of today. Assuming that prices are as current as the page "starting at $4700/mo" is indeed steep.
The pricing is a bit steep, as is MAE pricing. However, when initially building a network and peering infrastructure isn't it usually expected that you be able to peer at MAE-WEST, MAE-EAST, and AADS? I've noticed that the trend is gradually shifting away from this, as more and more networks choose exchanges like Equinix to form their core exchange points. This brings up a question I've been wondering about for some time; How many of you with peering policies that require geographical diversity on public peering sessions specify exchange point presence requirements? How many of you still only have public peering at the MAEs and AADS? Joe
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:57:59PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
I know Sprint won't peer with anyone small. I said in my inital post I don't stand a chance - but who knows, at the rate OC48 prices are dropping maybe next year I will meet the requirements. Attention K-Mart shoppers, WorldCom OC48's on sale in isle 5. ;-)
When OC48s are cheap, the peering requirements will become OC192. It has nothing to do with the ability to support the traffic exchanged, but everything to do with excluding you from peering with them. A lot of networks are now running peering requirements so hard that almost none of their existing peers would qualify (including some well known tier 1's).
The second point is, whomever you spoke to has violated a non-disclosure agreement, one that is normally taken seriously. I would tread carefully in this area, as it may get whomever you spoke with in a significant amount of trouble.
I didn't post this until now since I was waiting for a couple opinions to verify that it was in fact genuine, and as well a public filing that anyone could get if they know where to dig at the FCC.
Note the date, February 8, 2000. Over 2 years later is an eternity in peering requirement land. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
At 04:15 PM 6/27/2002 -0400, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 02:57:59PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
I know Sprint won't peer with anyone small. I said in my inital post I don't stand a chance - but who knows, at the rate OC48 prices are dropping maybe next year I will meet the requirements. Attention K-Mart shoppers, WorldCom OC48's on sale in isle 5. ;-)
When OC48s are cheap, the peering requirements will become OC192. It has nothing to do with the ability to support the traffic exchanged, but everything to do with excluding you from peering with them.
A lot of networks are now running peering requirements so hard that almost none of their existing peers would qualify (including some well known tier 1's).
This is not news. Remember when AGIS had peering requirements that AGIS could not meet?
Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras
-- TTFN, patrick
The obstruction to the AGIS ASN was removed by the bankruptcy courts. ;-) --On Thursday, 27 June 2002 16:30 -0400 "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net> wrote: <snip>
This is not news. Remember when AGIS had peering requirements that AGIS could not meet?
<snip>
-- TTFN, patrick
-- Joseph T. Klein jtk@titania.net "Why do you continue to use that old Usenet style signature?" -- anon
PWG> Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 16:30:06 -0400 PWG> From: Patrick W. Gilmore PWG> This is not news. Remember when AGIS had peering PWG> requirements that AGIS could not meet? Which seems to have translated into "remember AGIS?" Eddy -- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com> To: blacklist@brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
participants (8)
-
Alex Rubenstein -
Daniel Golding -
E.B. Dreger -
Joe Wood -
Joseph T. Klein -
Patrick W. Gilmore -
Ralph Doncaster -
Richard A Steenbergen