Having done peering for many $big_boys_club and $small_isps, it always comes down to politics, $$ and time. The balance may change but end of day its those variables and its a painful game some days. From all sides :(
-jim On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 1:07 PM Laura Smith via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote: > > > The bad news now, is, there are plenty of many, small, local > > and regional ISP's who are willing to do whatever it takes to > > work with the content providers. All that's required is some > > network, a half-decent data centre and an exchange point. Gone > > are the days where customers clamored to sign up with Big > > Telco. > > Speaking as one of those smaller ISPs willing to do whatever it takes, > perhaps you could answer me this riddle..... > > - PoP in one of your "half-decent data centres" ... tick. > - Connnection to one of your "exchange point" ... tick. > - $certain_large_cdn present on said "exchange point" ... tick. > > And yet ..... > > - $certain_large_cdn publishes routes on route server ? Nope. > - $certain_large_cdn willing to establish direct peering session ? Nope. > > I am well aware of the "big boys club" that operates at most exchanges > where the large networks see it beneath them to peer with (or publish > routes for the benefit of) the unwashed masses. > > But I struggle to comprehend why $certain_large_cdn would effectively cut > off their nose to spite their face ? >