I guess I didn't go on to say more about the router situation, but I meant an official network presence, diverse paths to other POPs, etc. for the first entry.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jay Hanke" <jayha...@gmail.com> To: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 9:35:28 AM Subject: Re: Virtual or Remote Peering I think you are talking about different applications of remote peering. If you connect to a remote IX via transport the routing decision is more along the lines is this packet destined to me. Having a router sitting in the "remote" colo is of little value. It would not help to keep the traffic local as there are only two paths. The router would just forward between the ports on either side. A common application of this is a "backup" IX to pick up content in the event of a failure at the primary IX. A wave service is just a very long cross connect in this regard. If you provide services across the IX and start bouncing things through remote ports (that could stay local). That is a different animal. Jay On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 6:41 AM, Mike Hammett <na...@ics-il.net> wrote: > A company you have a contractual arrangement with vs. random operators of > which neither you nor the end party have any relationship with. Which one's > unreliable, again? > > From a technical perspective: > router located with IX > wave to IX > switched PtP\PtMP to IX > remote > peering service > transit > > Fiscally, it's almost the other way around, with where transit goes being > variable based on locations and volumes. > > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > Midwest-IX > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Måns Nilsson" <mansa...@besserwisser.org> > To: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 12:42:21 AM > Subject: Re: Virtual or Remote Peering > > Subject: Re: Virtual or Remote Peering Date: Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 08:02:47AM > -0500 Quoting Mike Hammett (na...@ics-il.net): > >>>> How well does this service work? I understand it usually involves >>>> point-to-multipoint Switched Ethernet with VLANs and resold IX ports. >>>> Sounds like a service for ISP that would like to peer, but have relatively >>>> small volumes for peering purposes or lopsided volumes. > >>> Its like buying regular ip-transit, but worse. > >> That seems to be a rather lopsided opinion. > > You get connections to other operators over an unreliable path that you > have no control over, and the opportunities to keep traffic local are > limited. Adding to that, it is all your fault since your provider does > not do L3 and can claim a very passive rôle in the process. > > Like transit, but worse. > > -- > Måns Nilsson primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina > MN-1334-RIPE SA0XLR +46 705 989668 > YOW!! The land of the rising SONY!! >
