On Wednesday, June 01, 2011 02:31:45 AM vince anton wrote: > it surprises me that some people seem to be ok with > passing transit traffic over a peering link. I dont > understand why you would want to do this, as to me this > seems abuse or misconfiguration (possibly not > intentional), and potentially very expensive, or loss of > revenue.
It certainly is cheaper than moving that traffic via your upstreams :-). But seriously... Do I condone it, no. My point was, your customers will do strange things while you're asleep, while you're away on vacation, e.t.c. You can't always obviously catch the badness your customers are doing, especially if the amount of traffic that's affected is small. Over time, you can devise tools and ways to detect this kind of nonsense sooner, quicker. So my message is your policy should be to always pass your customer's traffic across their transit link with you. It's good for you. But it may not be good for your customer if they're multi-homed, or whatever, and this is where things get hairy. Work out what you can do in case your customer decides to have you forward him his traffic via your upstream or exchange point while you're asleep, in the short-term; then work out what your plan is in the long- term. Some of these solutions could be achieved via routing policy. Some couldn't. > the reason I asked the list for feedback on what is > considered good/general practise in this case, is that I > would like as much as possible to have considered all > possible scenarios while building my routing/p-eering > policy, and avoid re-inventing the wheel with the risk > of ending up with something square instead of round ! > > and of course telling your peer/customer your policy from > the start is usually, well, good policy :) It's hard to think about everything, because customers surprise you all the time, e.g., customer turns up at an exchange point and asks you for peering, especially if your government funds the exchange point and mandates that all licensees peer with everyone. What would you do in such a scenario? I hope you get my drift. Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
