On Jun 7, 2011, at 11:42 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote: > I concur, and I specifically would like to see a lot more *geographically* > local peering, so packets from Roar Runner[1] Tampa Bay to FiOS Tampa Bay > don't > have to clog up an exchang point in Reston or Dallas; this stuff *will* > eventually bite us in another Katrina-scale event.
What I've found interesting is the cost of circuits seem to not be distance-sensitive. I think this will contribute to mega-regional peering for the foreseeable future. (ie: dc, sj, dfw, chi, nyc, etc…) Unless these costs come closer to reflecting a balance then I suspect we will continue to see this regional networking. I had a hard time getting people to interconnect even in the CLEC COLO spaces. very few people had bgp capable devices in those locations, while they were big and had traffic, the gear for running bgp just wasn't there. - Jared
