RE: a question about the economics of peering
This is what exactly I said. Please see my comments. Regards Hitesh Patel -----Original Message----- From: Stephane Bortzmeyer [mailto:bortzmeyer@gitoyen.net] Sent: 01 December 2001 13:18 To: Alex Rubenstein Cc: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: a question about the economics of peering On Friday 30 November 2001, at 11 h 52, Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net> wrote:
While speaking with them today, thier engineer and I got into a little bit of a disagreement as to why people peer with each other at public exchange points.
There is also an important reason to be connected at several exchange points: reliability. If you just have one transit provider, you're more vulnerable than with one transit provider plus a variety of peerings, which will still carry at least part of the traffic if the main provider fails.
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, Hitesh Patel wrote:
There is also an important reason to be connected at several exchange points: reliability. If you just have one transit provider, you're more vulnerable than with one transit provider plus a variety of peerings, which will still carry at least part of the traffic if the main provider fails.
Under some definitions a transit free [IN]SP is Tier-1 - so you can tell your customers you have a Tier one as your fall-back - right ? ( ;-)
-- Rafi
participants (2)
-
Hitesh Patel
-
Rafi Sadowsky