North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: More Questions of Exchange Points
> >> The difference between a peering exchange and a transit exchange is a much > >> more easily technically-defined difference: a peering exchange is one > >> across which, by and large, the participants just exchange peering routes. > > > > Do you mean the participants just exchange BGP routing information? So the > > traceroute data will only discover the peering point they exchange traffic? > > The assumtion is that all ISPs exchange routes via BGP. What's at issue well, there are a fair number of exchanges built on a model developed by B.Greene, when BGP capability was not always there (often not a technology problem... :) They are still a number of them in existence. The exchange routes using an IGP and fate share over the exchange. The BGP'ness occurs at each of their upstreams. > is the degree of redundancy in the routes which they're exchanging. If > they're purchasing transit at or through a facility, it's to provide > reachability to things that they couldn't otherwise reach, either normally > or under conditions of failed peering. That makes the service much more > critical than peering, which is, by definition, an economic optimization > over transit. Thus, people are willing to spend much more money on a > facility through which they're putting transit, and they're willing to > tolerate a divided marketplace, as long as each facility is able to > maintain at least three sellers. I really need to read your paper. There appear to be a number of presumptions that are "cultural", for want of a better term, which bias your conclusions. > > ISPs exchange their traffic at IXs or private peering points, so which > > is more important to the ISPs (in term of traffic volume or other > > measures)? Maybe I should also mention co-locators, then what's the > > difference between co-locator and the "carrier hotel"? Are they like > > "physical layer exchange points" (if there is such a concept)? > > These aren't necessarily useful distinctions you're making. They're > distinctions of marketing positioning. What matters economically and > technically is how people use the facilities, not what they're called. Amen. > > -Bill > >
|