> Then you need to decide if you want to be a hop between those two peers or if > you want them to serve you only. You can change your routing so that both > providers know of your routes but you are not sharing routes between the two > providers.
The definition of “peering” to most ISPs would definitely not include becoming a “hop” between two peers. Most networks would de-peer you if you sent their prefixes to another peer. -- TTFN, patrick > On Jul 11, 2017, at 2:40 PM, Ethan E. Dee <e...@globalvision.net> wrote: > > Considering the wording you use, I would include this, > > 'Peering' is not always necessary. If you can get an upstream provider to > give you a pack of IP's and it is sufficient to just use them as a gateway > instead of setting up peering that would be preferred. > > If you decide you want to have multiple upstream providers or hit some kind > of speed cap is when I would probably peer with someone else. So that you can > keep your IP space but share it across a redundant connection from a > different provider. > > Then you need to decide if you want to be a hop between those two peers or if > you want them to serve you only. You can change your routing so that both > providers know of your routes but you are not sharing routes between the two > providers. > > BGP is an enormous protocol and extremely scalable so there is alot to > consider before you even decide if you want to peer. > > Because it can sometimes be a headache to setup. > > > On 07/11/2017 02:17 PM, Bob Evans wrote: >> There is one more thing to consider based on your app or content latency >> criteria needs. Do you provide a service that performs better with low >> latency - such as live desktop, live video/voice. You may wish to peer to >> have more control and more direct path to your customer base. If you >> identify your customer base in a specific region - then explore the best >> peering exchange points to utilize in that region. This can help you >> reduce your packet hop count/ deliver time, etc. etc.. >> >> Thank You >> Bob Evans >> CTO >> >> >> >> >>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 4:12 PM, craig washington < >>> craigwashingto...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Newbie question, what criteria do you look for when you decide that you >>>> want to peer with someone or if you will accept peering with someone >>>> from >>>> an ISP point of view. >>> >>> I assume you mean "reciprocal peering" in the sense of shortcut from your >>> customers to their customers rather than the more generic sense that any >>> BGP neighbor is a "peer". >>> >>> 1. What does it cost? If you and they are already on an IX peering switch >>> or you're both at a relaxed location where running another cable carries >>> no >>> monthly fee, there's not much down side. >>> >>> 2. Is the improvement to your service worth the cost? It's not worth >>> buying >>> a data circuit or cross-connect to support a 100kbps trickle. >>> >>> 3. Do you have the technical acumen to stay on top of it? Some kinds of >>> breakage in the peering link could jam traffic between your customers and >>> theirs. If you're not able to notice and respond, you'd be better off >>> sending the traffic up to your ISPs and letting them worry about it. >>> >>> If the three of those add up to "yes" instead of "no" then peering may be >>> smart. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Bill Herrin >>> >>> >>> -- >>> William Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us >>> Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/> >>> >> > > -- > Ethan Dee > Network Admin > Globalvision > 864 704 3600 > e...@globalvision.net > > For Support: > gv-supp...@globalvision.net > 864 467 1333 > > For Sales: > sa...@globalvision.net > 864 467 1333
