Caught out by uknof's reply-to behaviour being different to that other
place with the similar name....
I should have thought to add something else though...
It can also be the case that traffic between your network and theirs can be
more helpful or less unhelpful if it stays on a path via an existing
customer/peer or potential customer/peer.
If your traffic is part of that which helps with a ratio somewhere, for
example.
I believe Liberty/UPC primarily concern themselves with where very large
aggregate flows go. They bought a lot of traffic when they bought Virgin
and likely see that as something they can exploit to negotiate more
favourable interconnection terms with other large operators.
This is where the economic/commercial case can run counter to the customer
experience case. You see exactly the same thing with the large US access
providers and large content/OTT providers such as Netflix etc.
Of course, an operator with an international footprint like Liberty's may
just not believe for any of a variety of technical and operational reasons
that maintaining thousands of peering sessions across many countries is
beneficial, non-harmful, or worth the hassle.
I've sat and listened to a European telco tell the assembled international
peering community that they consider that they only need X peers and will
reduce to that.
The obvious exception to this is operators for whom that rich connectivity
is a significant element of their product - eg Akamai.
d.
--- Forwarded message ---
From: David Reader <da...@reader.me.uk>
Date: 5 May 2016 8:04:42 p.m.
Subject: Re: [uknof] Virginmedia
To: Joseph Waite <joeli...@tm.net.uk>
On 5 May 2016 6:51:46 p.m. Joseph Waite <joeli...@tm.net.uk> wrote:
Hi All
Yes we would love to speak to someone here who might be helpful at virgin
media as emails to their peering address get an auto reply saying it is
being dealt with and nothing happens.
General comment having read the thread so far...
IME email to peering role addresses of any operator of reasonable size is
rarely a good route for first contact. There are exceptions of course, but
it's something to try in the absence of other practical options.
The (once only) "hey, I've just joined $exchange who's up for it?" to the
distribution list will get most of those who'll be inclined to peer without
negotiation.
As a general rule, getting to know the peering, technical, and policy staff
of an operator in person is much more likely to yield constructive discussion.
Attend exchange meetings & peering forums; meet and talk and learn. Most
everyone is decent and reasonable. You won't get what you think you
want/prefer in many cases, but if you're reasonable and receptive you will
get to understand others' perspectives and motivations, and you will build
a network of contacts where you can help from time to time as well as be
helped.
Always remember that (SFI) peering is a privilege not a right, and if
you're asking first it's possibly more valuable to you than to them. Do
consider what they will get out of it, and also that larger organisations
often have greater cost in managing and operating peering relationships -
so the bar is higher - even if you can turn up a session on a whim at
insignificant cost it doesn't follow that they can or will. You'll find a
lot of commercial and strategic factors involved, most of which won't be
explicit.
Be prepared to consider and discuss other ways ends can be achieved even if
you don't like the means. Some operators might be open to peering trials if
there are clear success criteria and a realistic chance of meeting them.
Finally, I'll offer up my three best ways to not get peering and see if
anyone fancies contributing any others...
1. Telephone the other party's NOC and be abusive. Follow it up with an
abusive email for good measure. Or vice-versa.
2. Be a customer, and hence already paying to access their network, or a
recent customer and hence should have carried on paying if the access was
important.
3. Be a potential customer
d.
