[AusNOG] Vocus vs. Pipe - Was: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?

[Chris Ricks]

While that is true, mandated peering would do the same job.

On 09/11/12 09:22, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
> The one major thing the "Gang of Four" arrangement has given Australia
> is functioning domestic interconnect.  ie. the large networks all
> interconnect within Australia and do so in a way that means latency is
> sane. Am dealing with countries in other regions who actively use high
> latency (ie. sending your connectivity via another continent) as a way
> of trying to force you to buy THEIR transit product at high prices.
>
> MMC
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Smith <markzzzsmith at yahoo.com.au
> <mailto:markzzzsmith at yahoo.com.au>> wrote:
>
>     The assertion was peering is free / gratis / no money. That's
>     clearly incorrect, and I don't think you need much more than a
>     simplification to realise it.
>
>     It's worth remembering that the actual definition of the word
>     "peer" is
>
>     "a person who is the same age or has the same social position or
>     the same abilities as other people in a group" 
>
>     i.e. an *equal* based on a set of attributes.
>
>     Using Verizon as an example, Verizon's peering T&Cs list who they
>     consider to be somebody they'd be willing to directly peer with,
>     with lower requirements in ASPAC verses the rest of the world.
>     However, I doubt even Telstra would qualify, so it's likely that
>     Verizon also would like to get out of the so-called Gang of Four
>     arrangement, because they're being forced to peer with non-equals.
>     Telstra would probably have the same view on Optus and AAPT, and
>     Optus on AAPT. Considering that AAPT is no where near as big as
>     the other 3 they'd be gaining the most and providing the least.
>
>     Multilateral peering doesn't require the "peers" to be apparent
>     equals, however it is aggregating together the value the small
>     "peers" would provide such that there is value to the larger
>     "peers" to connect. Everybody who connects gains more from
>     connecting than it costs them. Those who choose not to connect, in
>     their judgement, don't gain more from it than it would cost them,
>     despite the many values of peering that Sam Silvester pointed out,
>     other than just "cheaper than transit".
>
>     Government forced peering means that some parties can get far more
>     value out of the arrangement than others - it isn't mutually
>     beneficial to everybody any more, in their individual perception.
>     If forced peering became the norm, could I force my residential
>     ISP to peer with my home network, "for free"? If big networks must
>     peer with smaller networks, then my home network qualifies as a
>     small one.
>
>
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     > From: Bevan Slattery <bevan at slattery.net.au
>     <mailto:bevan at slattery.net.au>>
>     > To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith at yahoo.com.au
>     <mailto:markzzzsmith at yahoo.com.au>>; Luke Iggleden
>     <luke+ausnog at sisgroup.com.au <mailto:luke%2Bausnog at sisgroup.com.au>>
>     > Cc: "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>"
>     <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>>
>     > Sent: Thursday, 8 November 2012 2:12 PM
>     > Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Vocus vs. Pipe - Was: Vocus peering
>     traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?
>     >
>     > And those that want to peer don't?
>     >
>     > TPG, iiNet and Nextgen are larger than AAPT and Verizon.  In
>     fact TPG and
>     > iiNet are larger than Optus in the ADSL market.
>     >
>     > Oversimplification me thinks...
>     >
>     > [b]
>     >
>     >>>
>     >>
>     >> So the rack space, cable infrastructure, routers, electricity,
>     24x7 NOC
>     >> etc. that you use to connect to them, *if* you qualify as a
>     peer, is all
>     >> free?
>     >>
>     >> Think about it. A company spends millions of dollars on
>     equipment and
>     >> installs fibre across Australia, and is then going to let
>     everybody use
>     >> it for gratis? That's a business plan to very rapidly go out of
>     > business.
>     >> I suspect the "free peering" myth has come from the days when
>     > residential
>     >> ADSL offered "free Pipe". The only reason it was "free"
>     > to customers was
>     >> that the ISP chose not to bill the customers for it.
>     >
>     _______________________________________________
>     AusNOG mailing list
>     AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
>     http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20121109/5496f45d/attachment.html>