Peering + Transit Circuits

[faisal at snappytelecom.net (Faisal Imtiaz)]

Thank you to everyone who has offered different explanations.. 

Yes, all it take is one party pooper to spoil a good party...

So now the question is (public or private) what is the best practices to protect the network ?

:)


Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom

----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Osmon" <josmon at rigozsaurus.com>
> To: "nanog list" <nanog at nanog.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 8:30:45 PM
> Subject: Re: Peering + Transit Circuits

> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 11:27:53PM +0000, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
>> Thanks for the explanation,
>> I am still trying to figure out the realistic business case where
>> doing something like this would make sense to any party.
>> (unless purely malicious or in error).
> 
> I'm sure others will reply as well, but in case it helps someone
> googling in years to come...
> 
> 
> Let's look at ParasiteNet, a content heavy network with three BGP
> peerings:
>  - Transit provider A via 100Mbps
>  - Transit provider B via 100Mbps
>  - Peer P via 1GBps (who also buys from provider B at 10G)
> 
> If ParasiteNet needed to push more than 100Mbps to provider B, they
> might be tempted to route the traffic to peer P, even though peer P
> didn't advertise those routes.
> 
> ParasiteNet gets a free ride if peer P doesn't notice what is going on
> (until they need more than 100Mbps inbound).
> 
> 
> I've been told of an occurance of this when a private network started
> peering with an edu network.  Once the link was up, an absurd amount of
> traffic went across the link -- all destined for "the Internet" rather
> than the edu network.
> 
> When the edu network shutdown the link, they were threatened with
> lawsuits...