[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers
- Subject: Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers
- From: elouie at yahoo.com (Eric Louie)
- Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 14:14:12 -0700
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <017601cea358$00a86ad0$01f94070$@com> <[email protected]> <01a101cea366$61326f50$23974df0$@com> <[email protected]>
I'm thinking that same thing, although after researching, the "de-peering
King" is probably not a contender as one of our primary upstream connection.
(And I don't have secondary or tertiary connections)
much appreciated,
Eric Louie
-----Original Message-----
From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu [mailto:Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 2:03 PM
To: Eric Louie
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers
On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 13:45:34 -0700, "Eric Louie" said:
> That's a good point with the Tier 2 providers. So that begs the
> question, why wouldn't I just get my upstream from a Tier 2? (Because
> my management is under the perception that we're better off with Tier
> 1 providers, but that doesn't mean their perception is accurate)
The good thing about your upstream being a Tier 2 is that it usually means
that if somebody's baking a peering cake, you're not one of the AS's that's
suffering.
Hmmm... if you're going for a connection to a Tier 1, maybe "peering cakes
per decade" is a valid criterion?