North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Peering Table Question

  • From: Jesper Skriver
  • Date: Fri Apr 21 13:38:23 2000

On Fri, Apr 21, 2000 at 05:54:48PM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:

> The problem is more accentuated outside of the US (in my belief). For
> instance, I can understand that the global players don't want to offer
> global routes to you if you want to peer with them at Stockholm DGIX, but
> this situation also means that if you buy bandwidth from a Tier 1 you get
> (often) lousy connectivity to local sites, sometimes routes go even
> transatlantic even if both sites are local but at different providers.
> Very inefficient. If Tier 1 providers would do more local peerings with
> local routes this problem would be much leviated. For instance, if I peer
> with UUNET in Stockholm I could get only UUNET Swedish customers from
> them. 

UUnet is especially "evil" in this respect, here in Denmark, UUnet is a
relative small provider, but targets end users heavily, and thus wants
to peer with the larger providers here, so their end users gets fast
connectivity to domestic sites. But they only advertise their danish
networks, and doesn't propagate our routes into the rest of AS702.

On the other hand, in countries where UUnet is the big player, like in
the UK, they refuse to peer - very inconsistent ...


Jesper Skriver, jesper(at)skriver(dot)dk  -  CCIE #5456

One Unix to rule them all, One Resolver to find them,
One IP to bring them all and in the zone to bind them.