If you don't have secondary connectivity, then I don't suggest going with a Teir 1. Using a peer-only as a transit link is not something I would recommend in general unless you know what you are doing in that regard, and have designed around the inevitable peering issues related to that decision.
-Blake On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Eric Louie <elo...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I'm thinking that same thing, although after researching, the "de-peering > King" is probably not a contender as one of our primary upstream > connection. > (And I don't have secondary or tertiary connections) > > much appreciated, > Eric Louie > > > -----Original Message----- > From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu [mailto:valdis.kletni...@vt.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 2:03 PM > To: Eric Louie > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers > > On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 13:45:34 -0700, "Eric Louie" said: > > > That's a good point with the Tier 2 providers. So that begs the > > question, why wouldn't I just get my upstream from a Tier 2? (Because > > my management is under the perception that we're better off with Tier > > 1 providers, but that doesn't mean their perception is accurate) > > The good thing about your upstream being a Tier 2 is that it usually means > that if somebody's baking a peering cake, you're not one of the AS's that's > suffering. > > Hmmm... if you're going for a connection to a Tier 1, maybe "peering cakes > per decade" is a valid criterion? > > > >
