[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
interconnection costs
- Subject: interconnection costs
- From: wwaites at tardis.ed.ac.uk (William Waites)
- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 19:00:54 +0000 (GMT)
- In-reply-to: <CACGuEhE1ZBWpvxm=uweriBtSMD5vrKk1u63bcB8_S5k1qiuu-w@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CACGuEhE1ZBWpvxm=uweriBtSMD5vrKk1u63bcB8_S5k1qiuu-w@mail.gmail.com>
there is also the increasingly common pattern of "remote peering"
where you lease a circuit to an exchange point but do not establish a
presence in the facility. this can either be done with the last leg on
a dedicated cross-connect (so it looks to the exchange operator just
like any other connection except that it is to an intermediary and not
to you) or multiplexed on a single connection to the exchange operated
by a carrier that specialises in facilitating remote peering.
to the extent that this practice dramatically decouples the peering
graph from the underlying infrastructure graph it is debatable if this
is a wise or efficient strategy. on the other hand it significantly
widens the operational scope of bgp configuration knobs.
but the point is, you can do peering without a physical presence in a
location, and it is a common thing to do.
cheers,
-w
--
William Waites <wwaites at tardis.ed.ac.uk> | School of Informatics
https://tardis.ed.ac.uk/~wwaites/ | University of Edinburgh
https://hubs.net.uk/ | HUBS AS60241
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.