On 22 December 2015 at 19:11, Reza Motamedi <motam...@cs.uoregon.edu> wrote: > Thanks guys for the replies. > > I wanted to clarify two things in my questions. First by peering I did not > necessarily mean "settlement free" interconnection. I meant any inter-AS > connection. My understanding is that in addition to the cost of transit that > should be paid to the transit provider, there also exists the cost of the > xconnect that is charged by the colocation provider. Secondly, my question > was more about the expenses, as opposed to the technical costs/benefits. I > have browsed through the "Peering Playbook", but I think its more about > providing a case "settlement free" peering.
Dude, how are you going to weigh up the costs and benefits of peering if you don't include the "costs". I refer you back to the same documented I referred you to yesterday... > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 9:33 AM, James Bensley <jwbens...@gmail.com> wrote: >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i2bPZDt75hAwcR4iKMqaNSGIeM-nJSWLZ6SLTTnuXNs/edit?pref=2&pli=1# This time look at section 4 of this huge and hard to navigate document, "4. Peering Costs": https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i2bPZDt75hAwcR4iKMqaNSGIeM-nJSWLZ6SLTTnuXNs/edit#heading=h.nqqauszv8vj Loosely extrapolating: Network transport: You need to be physically connected unless you blagged space in the same rack and can patch in for free. Hardware: You need tin to route packets. Software: You need software to monitor the packet routing. Colocation: You need space/power/cooler/security in which the tin can operate. Staffing costs: Someone has to configure that tin. Admin/engineering overhead: Someone has to manage the peering process Peering port: You probably have to pay to peer. Reseller ports: You might need remote connectivity to the LAN and "network transport" above would refer to a cross connect to the remote peering provider instead of directly into the IXP LAN. James.
