peering-toolbox:where-to-peer
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revisionLast revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
peering-toolbox:where-to-peer [2023/03/27 18:37] – [Physical Connection] philip | peering-toolbox:where-to-peer [2023/04/30 14:37] – [When to Consider] philip | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
+ | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
Line 41: | Line 42: | ||
(NEW) | (NEW) | ||
- | Sizing of capacity from one operator to another is critically important to ensure that money is not wasted either over-provisioning or under-provisioning. | + | Sizing of capacity from one operator to another |
- | Over-provisioning is usually preferred but comes at a cost, usually for physical infrastructure and any port charges. | + | **Over-provisioning** is usually preferred but comes at a cost, usually for physical infrastructure and any port charges. Advice from experienced operators is usually to provision enough capacity to allow for growth over at least the next 2 years - longer is better if there isn't a cost implication. |
+ | |||
+ | **Under-provisioning** is incredibly risky and is usually a very expensive mistake by any network operator, especially if the infrastructure has been difficult to procure and implement in the first place. It is strongly recommended to be avoided. It is not a good cost saving strategy! | ||
+ | |||
+ | As a general guideline, private peering link capacity is usually measured in multiples of the physical infrastructure available. For example, today, links in many parts of the Internet are counted in multiples of 10Gbps. The physical link may be 10Gbps even if the peering traffic may only be 1Gbps to 2Gbps. Indeed, provisioning two 1Gbps links for a private peering might well be considerably more expensive than provisioning a single 10Gbps link, even when port and optical transceiver cost is taken into account. | ||
==== Physical Connection ==== | ==== Physical Connection ==== | ||
Line 86: | Line 91: | ||
===== Public Peering / Internet Exchange Point ===== | ===== Public Peering / Internet Exchange Point ===== | ||
- | Public peering is where there is a public interconnect location where network operators can interconnect for the purpose of exchanging traffic. This public interconnect is known as an **Internet Exchange Point**. The following topics cover the aspects needed in any Public Peering setup. | + | Public peering is where there is a public interconnect location where network operators can interconnect for the purpose of exchanging traffic. This public interconnect is known as an [[: |
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
+ | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
* [[where-to-peer# | * [[where-to-peer# | ||
Line 100: | Line 106: | ||
Peering at an IXP is considered when there benefit for the entity (see the [[why-peer| Why peer]] section) to connect to the infrastructure to access other members present there: | Peering at an IXP is considered when there benefit for the entity (see the [[why-peer| Why peer]] section) to connect to the infrastructure to access other members present there: | ||
- | For a network operator, this may be to connect to other members (network operators, content and cloud providers, enterprises, | + | * For a network operator, this may be to connect to other members (network operators, content and cloud providers, enterprises, |
- | + | | |
- | For an enterprise, this may be to ensure higher quality access to services they host for the population served by the network operators connected to the IXP. Another strong motivator for an enterprise to join an IXP is to interconnect with content and cloud providers for more optimum (bandwidth, latency, service quality) connectivity. | + | |
Even if the IXP is small, there is still benefit in connecting, as the more members present, the greater value the IXP gives to all members, and the more attractive it is for other entities to join it. The largest IXPs all started with just a few members, and their value grew as more entities joined to exchange traffic. | Even if the IXP is small, there is still benefit in connecting, as the more members present, the greater value the IXP gives to all members, and the more attractive it is for other entities to join it. The largest IXPs all started with just a few members, and their value grew as more entities joined to exchange traffic. | ||
Line 112: | Line 117: | ||
Given the large concentration of network operators present, these public interconnects are often considered critical infrastructure, | Given the large concentration of network operators present, these public interconnects are often considered critical infrastructure, | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==== Sizing ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | (NEW) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Sizing of capacity from an operator to an IXP is critically important to ensure that money is not wasted either over-provisioning or under-provisioning. | ||
+ | |||
+ | **Over-provisioning** is usually preferred but comes at a cost, usually for physical infrastructure and any port charges. Advice from experienced operators is usually to provision enough capacity to allow for growth over at least the next 2 years - longer is better if there isn't a cost implication. | ||
+ | |||
+ | **Under-provisioning** is incredibly risky and is usually a very expensive mistake by any network operator, especially if the infrastructure has been difficult to procure and implement in the first place. It is strongly recommended to be avoided. It is not a good cost saving strategy! | ||
+ | |||
+ | As a general guideline, peering link capacity is usually measured in multiples of the physical infrastructure available. For example, today, links in many parts of the Internet are counted in multiples of 10Gbps. The physical link may be 10Gbps even if the IXP traffic may only be 1Gbps to 2Gbps. Indeed, provisioning two 1Gbps links to an IXP might well be considerably more expensive (and harder to implement BGP and routing policies to get equal link utilisation) than provisioning a single 10Gbps link, even when port and optical transceiver cost is taken into account. | ||
+ | |||
==== Physical Connection ==== | ==== Physical Connection ==== | ||
peering-toolbox/where-to-peer.txt · Last modified: 2023/04/30 14:39 by philip