Peering Policy

Peering Policies

Politiche di peering - 2010 NaMeX - 2

-  The Internet -  Interconnections: transit and peering -  Internet Peering Ecosystem -  Ecosystem members -  The Internet view

-  Why peer? -  Lower transit costs -  Lower latency -  Usage-based traffic billing -  Marketing benefits -  The benefit of peering

-  Internet eXchange Point -  The role of an IXP -  Common IXP features -  Public and private peering -  European IXPs: Big IXPs, participants, traffic exchanged -  Nautilus Mediterranean eXchange point


-  Internet Exchange point selection criteria

-  Transit VS Peering -  Definitions -  Cost of traffic in a transit relationship -  Cost of traffic in a peering relationship

-  Peering policies


The Internet: is a network of networks, interconnected in peering and transit relationships referred to as a Global Internet Peering Ecosystem

-  Ases are Identified by unique AS numbers

-  Ases can host IP resources on their network (web, mail, news, services)

-  Ases can have customers to whom they give connectivity

-  Ases interconnect with each other establishing routing paths to resources


Internet Transit: is the business relationship whereby one ISP provides (usually sells) access to all destinations in its routing table

-  Isp sells access to Internet, so….

-  An Isp must itself get attached to an Isp already attached to the Internet


Internet Peering: is the business relationship whereby companies reciprocally provide access to each others’ customers

Peering is a non-transitive relationship


The Global Internet Peering Ecosystem: consists of a set of Internet Regions that operate an Internet Peering


A Regional Tier 1 ISP (Transit Free) is an ISP that has access to the entire Internet Region Routing Table solely through Peering Relationship


A Tier 2 ISP is an ISP that has to purchase Transit to access some part of the Internet Region


A Content Provider focuses on content development and does not Sell access to the Internet


1)  Lower transit costs

2)  Lower latency

3)  Usage-based traffic billing

4)  Marketing benefits


-  Customer traffic need to traverse a couple of Transit Providers and accross great distances (high latency) before reaching other customer

-  Through direct peering interconnections ISP customers realize better performance

-  Keeping local traffic local

-  Processing delay

-  Queuing delay

-  Transmission delay

-  Propagation delay


-  Some ISPs charge customers based upon metered traffic

-  Packet loss and latency slows traffic consumption

-  It is in their best interest therefore to assure that customers use as much bandwidth as possible by minimizing loss and latency through effective traffic engineering

Marketing benefits

-  Some ISP pointed to the benefits of a network diagram rich in interconnections as a proxy for quality as seen by customer prospects

Usage-based traffic billing


-  Peering is a mutual agreement between peers, no entity is considered superior

-  Round trip times are dramatically reduced

-  Local communications are improved

-  Peering is often for free

-  Overall Internet reliability and robustness is highly improved

Direct peering introduces some benefits over a total hyerarchically tiered organization:


-  We can see the Internet as an interconnection of networks (or AS, Autonomous Systems)

-  Every single ISP has its own set of networks (an AS) and “buys” access to the “Big Internet” from upstream providers (larger ISPs), in a sort of tree-hierarchy

-  Without IXPs traffic between two ISPs (leaf nodes) would flow up and down through the hierarchy of upstream providers (slow and expensive)

-  By connecting to an IXP, ISPs can exchange inter-traffic, via BGP peering sessions, at a lower cost and better performance

-  IXPs have a crucial role in making the whole network infrastructure more fast and reliable


-  Wide choice of WAN fiber optics access carriers

-  High-performance switching (Layer-2) devices

-  Hosting space for ISPs network devices (mainly routers), structured cabling, reduntant power supplies

-  Additional services: monitoring and alarms, traffic and bandwidth statistics, redundant access

-  human peering: meetings and events to promote human relationships between network operators (both admins and techies)

-  NO REDUNDANCY !!


Public Peering is Internet Peering accross a shared peering fabric

Private Peering is Internet Peering accross transport with exactly two parties connected to it, usually a fiber cross connect or point to point circuit


-  Aggregation benefit

-  Easy of administration

-  Public peering is used as a selection criteria by customers

-  Public peering may be the only cost effective way to peer accross multiple colos

-  Private Peering Sessions are easy to monitor

-  Private peering is very cost effective

-  Private peering is more reliable and easy to debug

-  Private peering sessions are more Secure

Public Peering Private Peering

Hybrid Approach: public + private peering


What ?

Route Servers (RS) provide support for the establishment of peering arrangements between IXP peers: theoretically, a single peering session replaces a complex full mesh BGP interconnection

How ?

-  Each peer establishes a single BGP peering session with the RS, advertising its own prefixes

-  RS performs per-peer RIB calculation, applying input/output filter to overall received prefixes

-  RS announces each peer a set of prefixes resulting from the previous RIB calculation

-  RS is not involved in packet forwarding !


Country # IXPs Russia 14 Sweden 12 germany 11 france 10 U.K. 7 Norway 7 Italy 7 Netherlands 7 Ukraine 5 Finland 4


Total IXP participants

Unique ASNs

Present at > one IXP

Europe 5.264 3.103 902

Asia-Pac 1.112 643 213

N. America 2.045 840 306

S. America 313 186 49

Africa 201 113 3

Global 9.295 4.614 1.387


Participant ANS # of IXP EUR IXPs Google 15169 51 21

Akamai 20940 45 20

Limelight 22822 40 10

Hurricane 6939 36 14

Yahoo! 10310 28 5

Tata 6453 25 11

BroadbandONE 19151 25 3

Mzima 25937 24 2

E4A 34695 23 19

Easynet 4589 23 15

Verisign 26415 23 12


AMS-IX (Amsterdam Internet Exchange)

-  Number of members: 369 -  Number of sites: 7


AMS-IX infrastructure

-  AMS-IX is a distributed exchange, currently present at multiple independent co-location facilities in Amsterdam

-  Each site is equipped with one or more access devices to enable connections to the AMS-IX infrastructure

-  The current implementation of the AMS-IX peering platform uses an MPLS/VPLS infrastructure

-  Members connect with either Gigabit Ethernet (GE), 10Gigabit Ethernet (10GE) or multiples of these on the access devices


LINX (London Internet Exchange)

-  Number of members: 365 -  Number of sites: 10 -  Number of networks exchanged: 265.288


LINX infrastructure

-  The LINX Network consists of two separate high-performance Ethernet switching platforms installed across ten locations.

-  Switches from different equipment vendors are deployed in two diverse networks to provide an extra level of fault-tolerance, the logic being that both systems shouldn't develop the same fault at the same time.


DE-CIX (German Internet Exchange)

-  Number of members: 360 -  Number of sites: 13


De-CIX infrastructure

1)  Access Switches 2)  160 Gbps DWDM Systems & fiber protection devices 3)  Dark fiber backbone 4)  Backup dark fiber backbone 5)  Production and backup core switches


-  Neutral, member-based, not-for-profit IXP based in Rome

-  Founded in 1995, established as a consortium in 2001

-  Counting 38 members -  Larrge National ISPs and carriers -  Local IDPs and content providers (Akamai) -  International carriers (TATA, Telefonica, Cogent,

Interoute, GBLX, ...) -  Research network -  http://www.namex.it/en/who/members

-  Two main service categories -  Peering and other IP services -  Carrier interconnection services (physical)


-  Up to 12Gbps of exchanged traffic in the last year

-  Member of Euro-IX association

-  R&D partnerships with Roma 3 University and CNR

-  Hosting Italian Public Administration Qualied Exchange Network (QXN)


Double star with high capacity switching fabrics in the middle, routers around. Stars are physically and logically separated for redundancy and robustness.

-  Primary LAN: Enterasys

-  Secondary LAN: Cisco 6509-E

-  Vendor differentiation to enhance robustness against bugs and specific attack

-  Core business is mostly at Level 2 of ISO/OSI model


  Public and private peering, transit VLANs:

-  Redundant high-end switching platform

-  Members peering on public VLANs via BGPv4

-  Private peerings and transit on dedicated VLANs

-  IPv4/IPv6 support

-  ~12 Gbps aggregated traffic

-  Info: http://www.namex.it/en/services/publicpeering

  Additional services:

-  Global DNS: F-root and J-root name servers anycast replicas

-  AS112

-  Route Servers

-  iBGPlay: monitoring of BGP paths and reachability in real time

-  Meeting/Workshop

-  Info: http://www.namex.it/en/services/additional


  Housing and power supply for carrier equipments:

-  Full or partial rack housing

-  Redundant AC power

-  Cooling, monitoring, 24x7 access

  Meet-me-room for cross-connection

  Highest carrier and fiber density in town!

  The “grey” Internet:

-  Transits, transports, geographic links, dark fibers

-  Multiple layers: both physical and logical

-  Only physical demarcation is evident

-  Traffic volumes much higher than peering


1) Telecommunications access issues

-  How fast can circuits be brought into the interconnection environment?

-  How many carriers compete for business for circuits back to my local Point of Presence (POP)?

-  Are there nearby fiber providers?

-  How fast can my peer and I get connectivity into the exchange?


2) Deployment issues

-  How do I get my equipment into the exchange?

-  Do I ship equipment in or do I have to bring it with me as I fly in?

-  Will someone act as remote hands and eyes to get the equipment into the racks or do I do the installation myself?

-  what are the costs associated with deployment (travel, staff time, etc.) into this exchange?

-  Does the exchange have sufficient space, power, air conditioning, etc.


3) ISP Current Presences issues

-  Number of participant ?

-  Number of interesting participant ?

-  ........


4) Operations issues

-  Does the exchange allow private network interconnections?

-  Are there requirements to connect to a central switch?

-  How is access and security handled at the facility ?

-  Is there sufficient power, HVAC, capacity at the switch, space for additional racks, real time staff support ?

-  Is it easy to upgrade my presence over time?


5) Cost issues

-  What is the cost and value of this IXP ?

-  What are the rack fees, cross connect fees, port fees, installation fees?

-  What are the future operating fees going to be?

-  What are the motivations and parameters surrounding these fees?


Internet Transit: is the business relationship whereby one ISP provides (usually sells) access to all destinations in its routing table

Internet Peering: is the business relationship whereby companies reciprocally provide access to each others’ customers

Transit is simple: Internet this way

Peering is a non-transitive relationship


Internet transit billing Internet peering billing

-  Transport of the traffic into the exchange point

-  Colocation space

-  Equipment

-  A port on the exchange point shared fabric


-  Internet Transit Price Declines

-  Internet traffic volumes have always grown

When does it make sense to Peer?


ISP goals

-  ISPs seek peering primarily to reduce transit costs and improve performance (lower latency)

-  get peering set up as soon as possible

-  minimize the cost of the interconnection and their transit costs

-  maximize the benefits of a systematic approach to peering -  selection of exchange environment -  identification of potential peers -  identification (ideally) of traffic eXchanged


A Peering Inclination is a predisposition towards or against peering as demonstrated by Peering behavior in a Peering Ecosystem

A Peering Policy is an articulation of the Peering Inclination;

There are three general classes of Peering Inclinations seen in the Peering Ecosystem


Open: entity will generally agree to peer with anyone (no prerequisites)


Selective: entity will generally peer but there are some prerequisites


Restrictive: the entity is generally not open to new peering


Finally, the peering networks reaches the plateu of the "tier 1" network


Thanks

Flavio Luciani

E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.namex.it

Peering Policy

Documents

Transcript of Peering Policy