North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Tier Zero (was Re: Tier 2 - Lease?)
> > On 5/4/06, [email protected] <[email protected] > karoshi.com> wrote: > > > > > > why would anyone do that? > Hopefully this comes out clearly, as writing can be more confusing > than speaking... > My point is it is hard to do anything beyond the first AS# for any SLA > that you would be paying, since after that the packet switches to no > money packets on a paid connection, pushing out the issue for things > sent down that pipe... Are you saying that there *IS* a good reason why anyone would buy paid transit from all SFP providers? And that the reason is so that you have a contractual SLA with all of those providers? If so then two questions come to mind. Couldn't you achieve the same thing by having paid peering with the SFP providers? Assuming that you do have contractual service with all of the SFP providers and that there is an SLA in all of those contracts, how do you deal with the fact that there is no SLA (to you) on packets which leave the set of SFP networks? Packets could leave by going to a transit customer of an SFP network or by going to a non-SFP peer of an SFP network. Quite frankly, while terminology like "transit", "settlement free peering" and "paid peering" are useful to analyze and talk about network topography, I don't think they are useful by themselves when making purchase decisions. They need to be backed up with some hard technical data about the network in question as well as the contractual terms (transit or peering) in place. It is not possible to say that a given network architecture is BETTER if you only know the transit/peering arrangements between that network and some subset of the other network operators. SFP operators will always be a subset of the entire public Internet. Membership in that set changes from time to time for various reasons. And the importance of non-members also varies from time to time, especially content-provider networks. --Michael Dillon P.S. I purposely did not use the term "tier" because I do not believe that current usage of this term refers to network architecture. It has more to do with market dominance than anything else and even there it is relative because there is no longer a single Internet access market.