This is all however going on the assumption that when joining an IXP the ASNs your traffic is destined to/from that the ISP in question or their upstream is willing to peer with you on a settlement free basis. Getting a peering port doesn’t guarantee you’ll get the routes you need on it, and as such may not do any traffic.
Regards, Marty Strong -------------------------------------- CloudFlare - AS13335 Network Engineer [email protected] +65 9178 8502 SG +44 7584 906 055 UK smartflare (Skype) http://www.peeringdb.com/view.php?asn=13335 > On 17 Sep 2015, at 16:58, James Bensley <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 15 September 2015 at 06:44, Mark Tinka <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> On 14/Sep/15 19:42, Paul Thornton wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> You don't have the entire routing table @LINX yet :) >> >> And depending on your operation, transit could be cheaper than peering. > > And peering can be cheaper than transit [1] :) > > This is especially true at lower traffic volumes as one major gain > with peering is that you pay for a port rather than a specific CDR and > you can use as much bandwidth on that port as you like (although you > can buy less that the physical port speed these days but not at evey > exchange). > > Also if you only have a handful of AS's that count's for %-major of > your egress/ingress traffic then if you can peer at an exchange with > all those guys present and peer with them you can offload the bulk of > your traffic without the need for a CDR on a transit link providing > global access when you don't need all that visibility. > > Cheers, > James. > > [1] These are genuine figures I have tweaked so they don't resemble > any IXP I have connect to so there isn't any obvious bias etc.... > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1i2bPZDt75hAwcR4iKMqaNSGIeM-nJSWLZ6SLTTnuXNs/edit?pli=1#heading=h.qfxzw1efv02w > > Usual YMMV caveat, in the UK we are rather spoilt compared to some > parts of the world with LoNAP and LINX. >
