[ILUG] [OT ish] Peering - Ireland and the world

[Paul Jakma]

On Tue, 8 May 2001, Chris Higgins wrote:

> What two layers ? Are you saying then that BigTelcos don't sell
> direct to end customers ?

some probably do. but there's a definite difference in the markets
that each are geared at.

> What about mister huge global corporate software company that has
> a policy of only buying bandwidth from BigTelco... where is his
> local peering in Ireland ?

none. but if peering is an issue they buy a line from a national isp.

> He doesn't qualify as an ISP so he can't join INEX... and anyway
> why should he have to join INEX to get national peering - why
> can't his ISP do that for him ?

the irish ISPs do.

> Anyway - you can't split the network into 'big' and 'small', and force
> all the customers to buy though 'small'..
>
> So while your point is argued well, your basis is flawed. There are no
> layers.. It might be fair to talk about layering in the USA context, but

[snip]

> In the Irish context the national 'tier one' networks are the Eircom
> (Eircom Net / Indigo), the Esat (Esat Net, IOL/PostGEM) and the HEAnet
> networks.

USA <-> Ireland??

no USA <-> Europe.

> Arriving into a country, connecting up two customers locally and then
> claiming that you are servicing the country but can't route traffic
> locally within the country is what caused the erroneous statement from
> microsoft in the first place.

look, if BigTelco sees enough traffic from his customers going to
irish destinations, then maybe then it might be enough of
a financial motivation for them to peer at INEX.

However:

These BigTelcos (and by BigTelco we're not talking small fry like
Eircom) probably do not even peer their /own/ irish traffic in
ireland, or maybe customers of theirs have /paid/ for their bandwidth
to go directly into the UK.

In those cases, how are they going to peer at INEX?

> Are you claiming that 'BigTelcos' peering at LINX and AMS-IX is somehow
> more efficient that them peering at INEX ?

Yes. most definitely...

it'd be nice if INEX became a european super-peer - but it has make
sense, and it doesn't.

> How can you make this statement when you responded to my [1] footnote
> with 'exactly...'

groan...

because the most direct route would be:

murpynet - INEX - ryan

not

murphynet - GlobalFoo - INEX - Ryancom

or worse

murphynet - GlobalFoo - INEX - Foonet - Ryancom

ie the most direct route does not involve upstream providers peering
at INEX.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul at clubi.ie	paul at jakma.org
PGP5 key: http://www.clubi.ie/jakma/publickey.txt
-------------------------------------------
Fortune:
I saw a subliminal advertising executive, but only for a second.
		-- Steven Wright