I've got an offer on the table through a bandwidth aggregator and reseller for space at Equinix and to pick up Tinet and Global Crossing for a reasonable price on 2 Gig total commit over a 10 GigE to each provider. My current traffic levels are less then 500 Mbps peak, we're growing fast, and we're single-homed to HE in Freemont 2.
My top 10 inbound ASN's by volume are:
On the outbound side, I'm looking at Equinix 9 Great Oaks for peering about 40% my traffic to Google, Yahoo, Akamai and Facebook with the rest going out as transit.
What could go wrong choosing Tinet and Global Crossing as opposed to other providers?
What would be the effect of choosing to take default routes versus full plus customer routers from Tinet and Global Crossing?
How would you feel about a pair of Juniper MX80-48t's for the dual 10GigE transit links and dual 1GigEs for peering into the Equinix fabric?
You've been approved for peering with Google? It is fairly easy if you pass more than 100 Mbit/sec with them, but that is basically a requirement, at least last I checked. They used to also require multiple points, but seems they might not be as strict about that anymore.
At your traffic levels I'm not sure peering in one location will get you your money's worth, but it is always good to have it as an option.
Tinet and GBLX are both solid providers. I prefer a couple others slightly over them myself, but those two are quality as well, especially at the right price. Is it GT-T offering the good rates by chance? We had them spam us recently offering Tinet, GBLX and a couple others.
Not yet, I believe we'll reach the 100 Mbit threshold by the time we spin up the data center. At this point, I've only broached the peering question with Yahoo who responded with a thumbs up. This is new territory for me and Google is an important network for us so I'd like to start with someone else and then approach Google later.
According to Google's peering DB entry, the 100 Mbit level is a threshold for private or direct peering. Below that level, it appears you may peer via the route server:
Liberal peering policy subject to certain technical, commercial and legal requirements:
- Maintain a publicly routable ASN
- publicly routable address space (at least one /24)
- ASN record completed in PeeringDB
- 24x7 NOC contact capable of resolving BGP routing issues
- Fault management escalation list
- Presence at one or more of the IXes or accessible colocation facilities
Peering Traffic Requirements (IPv4):
+ Peers in North America or Western Europe with less than 100Mbps peak of Google traffic may peer via route servers at participating IXes.
+ Peers with more than 100Mbps peak of Google traffic may peer via a bilateral BGP session over an IX.
Google represents 2% of our inbound and 18% of our outbound traffic. If I've got the peering figured out wrong, it changes things for us so please let me know.
I realize our numbers are small and that port fees are not free. We'd probably be more in the 2-2.5 Gbit peak territory before any peering would be initiated. It still might not save us money but we're looking at it more strategically by choosing a data center that could support the option.
As for the deal, it came from MosaicNetworx described to me as a CLEC and bandwidth aggregator/wholesaler. They put us in touch with Equinix.
Last edited by dmst; 04-01-2011 at 01:30 AM.
I second this keep it simple. If you are already in FMT2, just pick up a gig of HE there and then do a 1Gig wave link to 11 Great Oaks or Switch and Data in Palo Alto to pick up a second provider. I am looking at Level(3) but there are many other choices. I would not worry about going 10Gig until you need to. Perhaps bring up a 3rd link to 11 Great Oaks Any2 peering fabric as the next option.
Regarding HE FMT2, we've outgrown the space there. The racks are 15A only, we're in three racks because of the power density limitation. They have no A/B power and we've had two power outages there already. I'm running APC UPS's inside my rack to hold up the DB servers in case this happens again. There are other major issues I won't go into until I'm out of there.
According to the peeringdb, Cogent doesn't appear to be IP POP'd at Equinix San Jose. In talking with the peering coordinator at Equinix, he asked who my upstreams were. His response to Tinet and Global Crossing was positive. He said that potential peers will be more likely to agree to an arrangement with you based on your upstreams. Also, I think having two tier one's will mean both my upstreams are roughly equally connected to the net given me a more balanced inbound ratio out of the box.
We've got dual 1GigE links into a single core router at FMT2 feeding two routers at our edge.
We will exceed 2 Gbps of demand by the end of this year which leads me to the dual 10G option.
I do hear FMT2 had some power issues, we have been in FMT1 pretty much since it opened and never had a power outage.
Even if you move to 11 Great Oaks you could still use HE as a transit provider. (They have a major pop there) I really like their network, they are cheap but still good quality and they seem to have good peering.
You may also want to consider a Santa Clara Data Center (For example QTS by mission collage) Santa Clara is not on the PG&E grid and immune from rolling blackouts. While this may save you some on the data center costs you will probably have to back haul large data connections to 11 Great Oaks, 55 South Market or Bryant Street.
Tinet has an extensive network in Europe, so it's a good addition to a US centric network in order to get good overseas coverage.
Tinet has a pretty good coverage in the US as well, we've been using them as one of our suppliers for over a year now and very happy with their US peering. We have used HE and they suck at times as their peering isn't really hot, but then you get what you pay for...