[AusNOG] Pipe/Equinix Peering Costs

[Joshua D'Alton]

You'd think though in Australia it'd be a lot more obvious the financial
penalties for having said filtering. In this case TPG is having to pay a
lot vs a little (or being paid in the original situation). Surely it'd be
better for them to accept the customer routes at a lower priority, it isn't
like its they'd have performance issues (their routers are handling 1/10th
the traffic for their size/revenue compared to US/EU counterparts)?

Also, I think you mean transit-free (tier1?) included? By definition
transit-free wouldn't/couldn't be peering with customers?

On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:48 PM, Cameron Daniel <cdaniel at nurve.com.au> wrote:

>
> It's not uncommon for transit networks to filter customer routes on all
> peering links, whether the customer happens to be advertising the route on
> the customer<->provider session at the time or not. I think you'll find
> most providers do that, transit-free networks excluded.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130503/bb03dcb5/attachment.html>