nanog mailing list archives
Re: Google peering pains in Dallas
From: Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 19:18:07 +0100
Jared Mauch wrote on 30/04/2020 19:09:
ixps have always been a mid-market phenomenon. They don't deal with the high volume data flows because it never made financial sense to do that. At the lower end, they have a cut-off point which broadly aligns with smaller wholesale requirements. For the bits in between, they can provide good value.This is why the majority of traffic volume for interconnection has generally been over private peering links (paid, SFI, otherwise).
Nick
Current thread:
- Google peering pains in Dallas Kaiser, Erich (Apr 29)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Christopher Morrow (Apr 29)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas William Allen Simpson (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Saku Ytti (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Aaron C. de Bruyn via NANOG (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Christopher Morrow (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Jared Mauch (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Matthew Petach (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Seth Mattinen (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas William Allen Simpson (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Christopher Morrow (Apr 29)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Nick Hilliard (Apr 30)
- Re: Google peering pains in Dallas Niels Bakker (Apr 30)