Re: a question about the economics of peering

[Nigel Titley <nigel () titley com>]

Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> Nigel, Nanog:
>
> The original intent of the inquiry was not to bring into question the
> intelligence of Nigel; I can't speak to that since I don't know him, nor
> did I even know of him. My communication also does not speak to the
> potential success of PacketExchange.
>
> My question was simply a curiosity ping of _why_ people peer with each
> other; in my mind, it had always, and never not, been a way to reduce cost
> of traffic sent/rec'd. I was curious as to whether or not others had a
> similar view to mine.

And I'd like to place on record that I had no real problem with Alex's
original email. It was only when the thread began to drift towards the
personal that I spoke up.

My own personal view is that there are a number of reasons for peering:
including but not limited to cost, shorter paths to desirable data
sources, "my network is bigger than yours", reduced latency etc. Mix and
match according to company policy/ personal inclination.

All the best

Nigel