Presentation on theme: "Evolution 0.9: The Evolution of the U.S. Peering Ecosystem Gigabit Peering Forum VII Herndon, VA September 9, 2003 William B. Norton Co-Founder & Chief."— Presentation transcript:
Evolution 0.9: The Evolution of the U.S. Peering Ecosystem Gigabit Peering Forum VII Herndon, VA September 9, 2003 William B. Norton Co-Founder & Chief Technical Liaison Equinix, Inc.
Internet Researcher Four Years of Research Document Internet Operations Practices – Interconnect/Peering/IXes/etc. Research Process – Focus with Community and –Write White Paper version M.m –Walk throughs & Feedback –Fix/Update Paper 200 Walkthroughs later – a document reflecting community Internet Operations knowledge So far 6 White Papers
Internet Operations White Papers 1)“Interconnection Strategies for ISPs” 2)“Internet Service Providers and Peering” 3)“A Business Case for Peering” 4)“The Art of Peering: The Peering Playbook” 5)“The Peering Simulation Game” 6)“Do ATM-based Internet Exchanges Make Sense Anymore?” Freely available. Send e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org New white Paper: The Evolution of the U.S. Peering Ecosystem, Agenda…
Agenda The Evolution of the Internet Peering Ecosystem –The Internet Peering Ecosystem Environment –Each Player, their Motivations, their Behavior Four Major Events, led to … Three Major Evolutions in the Peering Ecosystem
The Evolution of the U.S. Peering Ecosystem Act I: 1998-2000
The Internet Peering Ecosystem The Environment The Players –Their role in the Peering Ecosystem –Their behavior in the Peering Ecosystem –Their relationship to others in the Peering Ecosystem The Evolution of the Peering Ecosystem
The Internet Peering Ecosystem Many “Internet Regions” (usually defined by geopolitical boundaries) Each with its own Peering Ecosystem consisting of –Tier 1 ISPs –Tier 2 ISPs –Content Players and Enterprises
Interconnect Regions Large Internet Regions have multiple geographical areas where ISPs peer
Player: Tier 1 ISPs Def: A Tier 1 ISP is an ISP that has access to the entire Regional Internet routing table solely through Peering Relationships (I.e. doesn’t buy transit from anyone).
Tier 1 Peering Full Mesh Peering among Tier 1 ISPs within each Interconnect Region
Tier 1 Peering Across the U.S. 8 Interconnect Regions
Tier 1 Peering Motivations Generally not interested to peer with anyone else 1)They already get the traffic for free 2)They may be foregoing revenue (they could sell transit) 3)They don’t want to give away that which differentiates them
Player: Tier 2 ISP Def: A Tier 2 ISP is an ISP that purchases (and therefore resells) transit within an Internet Region.
Tier 2 ISP Peering Motivations 1)Reduce transit costs 2)Improve Performance 3)Greater control over routing
Tier 2 Peering Sparse Mesh Peering in each Interconnect Region
Tier 2 ISPs Widely varying characteristics and behaviors Scope: Global, National, Regional, Local Underfunded to well funded Food fights to solid relationships within the community Big Peoples Table and Little Peoples Table perhaps a bad generalization
The Content Provider and Enterprise Player Always buy transit Focus on Content Focus on Service Few Network Engineers SLAs valuable
Peering Inclinations and Peering Policies Def: A Peering Inclination is a predilection towards or against peering as demonstrated by Peering behavior in a Peering Ecosystem Def: A Peering Policy documents and defines the prerequisites to peering.
Four types of Peering Inclination Open Peering – Anyone, Anywhere Selective Peering – Some Requirements Restrictive Peering – No No Peering – No, prefer buying transit
The Evolution of the U.S. Peering Ecosystem Act II: 2000-2003
Evolution of the U.S. Peering Ecosystem Four key events leading to drastic disruption in the Peering Ecosystem: 1)The 1999/2000 Telecom Collapse 2)The growth of the Used Equipment Market 3)The Upstream Provider for the Cable Companies (@Home) went bankrupt 4)Peer-to-Peer file sharing systems (like Kazaa) grow in popularity, traffic grows exponentially between Access Providers (1.5MB MP3 700MB AVI files) Leads to 3 Major Evolutions
Evolution #1 – Cable Companies are Peering 40% of traffic Kazaa 3-5 Gbps of transit traffic-> Gbps of peering potential ! Significant because 1)Volume 2)Open Peering 3)Kazaa Effect
Evolution #2 – Network Savvy Large Scale Content Companies get into Peering To reduce transit costs To improve the end user experience They need to move out of bankrupt colo anyway Significant because 1)Volume of traffic is huge 2)Content Providers have Open Peering 3)Leading players pave the way
Other Broadband Players Significant, but… Not Open Peers so disincentive to peer So less volume and less disruptive
Evolution #3 – Cable Companies Freely Peer with Content Companies Content literally on the Cable Company Network Lowest possible latency from content to eyeballs Internet Gaming, Broadband Streaming, etc.