> - time taken to turn around BGP import filter changes So much This... You don't realize how important this is until your nationwide provider takes 8 WEEKS to add one network to your (already set up and working for 20 other networks) peering. Then decides to charge you a fee for the change.
Ben Hatton Network Systems Engineer On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Justin M. Streiner <strei...@cluebyfour.org > wrote: > On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Eric Louie wrote: > > Good stuff Justin - Any other criteria that you would use? >> > > Joe covered a lot of good stuff in his response. > > A few providers call themselves Tier 1, though the accuracy of those > assertions is often suspect. The truth can be somewhat more complicated... > and exactly how much more complicated isn't always clear > until Provider X gets de-peered by Provider Y and finds themselves having > to negotiate a quick fix, often by cutting a check. > > I would also ask people here who they have had very good experiences with, > regardless of what "tier" the provider fits into. > > jms > > > -----Original Message----- >> From: Justin M. Streiner >> [mailto:streiner@cluebyfour.**org<strei...@cluebyfour.org> >> ] >> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 9:17 AM >> To: nanog@nanog.org >> Subject: Re: Evaluating Tier 1 Internet providers >> >> On Tue, 27 Aug 2013, Eric Louie wrote: >> >> Based on various conversation threads on Nanog I've come up with a few >>> criteria for evaluating Tier 1 providers. I'm open to add other >>> criteria - what would you add to this list? And how would I get a >>> quantitative or qualitative measure of it? >>> >> >> Define "Tier 1 provider". I ask this because it's something that many >> people don't know what it means, but assume that Tier 1 > Tier !=1. >> >> routing stability >>> >> >> Routeviews.org can shed some light here. >> >> BGP community offerings >>> >> >> If $provider has a page on www.peeringdb.com, they might publish a list >> of >> their BGP communities there. Other places to look would be the provider's >> whois/IRR entries, and on their respective websites, or the >> sales/marketing >> folks might be able to get this information for you. >> >> congestion issues >>> >> >> There are various internet traffic report / weather report sites that can >> give you indirect insight into things like. By indirect, I mean that you >> might be able to infer things like congestion at a specific point based on >> what you see on those sites. >> >> BGP Peering relationships >>> >> >> You can look at pages like www.peeringdb.com, and you will typically see >> if >> $provider is at an exchange, however the peering relationships that many >> providers have other providers (locations, speeds, etc) are confidential. >> >> path diversity >>> >> >> You can ask $provider's sales and marketing folks, but there is no >> guarantee >> that you will get an answer (actual routes are considered confidential and >> proprietary information, despite the fact that a lot of providers' fiber >> ends up converging in a small handful of routes in some areas - i.e. many >> of >> them follow the same set of railroad tracks or cross a river at the same >> bridge, possibly even in the same conduit) or a correct answer (wave X >> might >> be re-groomed onto path Y without a whole lot of customer notification). >> >> IPv6 table size >>> >> >> Sites like routeviews.org can give you some visibility here. >> >> Seems like everyone offers 5 9's service, 45 ms coast-to-coast, 24x7 >>> customer support, 100/1Gbps/10Gbps with various DIR/CIR and burst rates. >>> I'm shopping for new service and want to do better than choosing on >>> reputation. (or, is reputation also a criteria?) >>> >> >> Absolutely reputation should be a factor. I would argue that Internet >> access is largely commoditized anymore (and has been for several years), >> so >> the real differentiators are cost and level of service. >> >> jms >> >> >> >> >