nanog mailing list archives

Re: "Peering Router"


From: Mike Hammett via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2026 01:56:31 +0000 (UTC)

I had that last one once. The IP guy really wanted to join us, but he didn't have the capability in that facility. He 
wanted us to go to a tier 3\4 market where he had a ton of capacity. His company's transport team had available 
capacity, but they didn't want to give it to the IP guy. I thought it was a BS answer at the time, but as time has gone 
on, I've learned that silos in companies really can be that bad.



-----
Mike Hammett
FD-IX
https://fd-ix.com/

DNA Communications
https://www.dnacom.com/

----- Original Message -----
From: "Julien Goodwin via NANOG" <nanog () lists nanog org>
To: "North American Network Operators Group" <nanog () lists nanog org>
Cc: "Julien Goodwin" <nanog () studio442 com au>
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2026 8:49:47 PM
Subject: Re: "Peering Router"

On 1/5/26 11:27 am, sronan--- via NANOG wrote:
Lots of networks segregate duties, so they may not want a peering connection a router they primarily use for 
downstream client connections. Translated, they sell services in that market, but don’t want to transit traffic on 
that same router.

It doesn't even need to be a "want". We reduced what types of peering we 
took on AS15169 core routers (and later eliminated all of them entirely) 
not only for reasons that would fall under "want", but we'd also started 
running into various memory limitations (ACL programming, etc.) on our 
core boxes due to the breadth of configs, and eliminating them meant we 
didn't need to replace line cards or worse in boxes that were otherwise 
trivially handling their traffic needs.

This was all well over a decade ago now, but my vague memory is at the 
time there were only an extremely small number of sessions with 
non-Google entities (probably less than five) that were actually turned 
down because of this instead of just shifted to another router in the 
area (or possibly nearby metro).

The other annoying one you can sometimes hear is that a network won't 
peer with you in a certain facility even though you can see transport 
kit that's clearly theirs present. Can be many reasons for that too.
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/J52MV5ETKIDMSIYADW4M6T5JD6TFMJH3/

_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/RDXRDV5NRHYQELIKXPSMIKIIRZYJRAVF/

Current thread: