D R A F T 1.9 William B. Norton The Asia Pacific Internet Peering Guidebook (v1.9) William B. Norton <[email protected]> Abstract How does Internet Peering work in Asia? How is it different from Peering in the U.S. or Europe? If International Peering is different across the globe, Introduction: The Global Internet Ecosystem what does one need to know before expanding a network into a new country? Internet Peering in Asia The Internet is best described as a network of has largely been undocumented, with the popular networks. An Internet Operations view of this system perception in the Internet Operations community that reveals sets of players, each with motivations and Internet Peering in Asia is “just different”. This observed behaviors in common within geographical research provides a framework for comparing areas that I will call Internet Peering Ecosystems. Internet Ecosystems with a little more specificity, Definitions. Within each of these Internet Peering based on conversations with about one hundred Ecosystems we find at least three categories of International Peering Coordinators that have built players: into and within Asia. These International Peering Coordinators shared ten specific lessons they wish • Tier 1 ISPs (ISPs that have access to all they had learned prior to their Asian expansion. the Internet Peering Ecosystem routes solely through free peering This White Paper begins by introducing the Internet relationships), as a set of loosely connect Internet Ecosystems (countries typically), each with at least three • Tier 2 ISPs (that must buy transit from categories of players. We define each category of someone to reach routes within the player, their position in the “Internet Ecosystem” Internet Peering Ecosystem), and along with their corresponding motivations that • Content Providers who don’t sell access explains their peering behaviors. to the Internet but offer content. In the process of the research we identified the “Foreign Tier 1 Peering Dynamic.” This dynamic is not limited to Asia but indeed exists globally, where Tier 1 ISPs in one Internet Peering Ecosystem are relegated to Tier 2 ISPs as they expand into a foreign Internet Peering Ecosystem. We explain why this occurs by applying the aforementioned definitions and motivations. To apply these definitions and share some of the more interesting country-specific insights shared by the Peering Coordinators, we have identified the key players in four specific Internet Peering Ecosystems; Japan, Singapore, Australia and Hong Kong. We apply the “Business Case for Peering” methodology using current transit and peering costs in each Peering Ecosystem. We then share five reasons the Peering Coordinators said that they expanded into and within Asia, along with four strategies for interconnecting within Asia. Ten “Lessons Learned” finish up the section of Figure 1 - The Global Internet Peering collective knowledge from the group. In this section Ecosystem we also present rough transport/colo/transit pricing figures so the reader can better appreciate the These rough classifications and definitions are differences in Internet Ecosystems across Asia. This important because they help us understand each is necessary to understand the financial sides to the player’s motivations as reflected in their observed peering-transport-transit equation. behavior. Motivation and Behavior. Tier 1 ISPs do not need to William B. Norton Page 1 2/10/10 DRAFT The Asia Pacific Internet Peering Guidebook W. B. Norton buy transit since by definition they can reach all the if you have a pulse we will peer with you!” Content networks in the Internet Peering Ecosystem solely Players and most Tier 2 ISPs seek to reduce their through free peering relationships. Stated most transit fees by peering broadly by announcing to the eloquently by Waqar Khan (Qwest, a Tier 1 ISP in peering community that they have an Open Peering the U.S.), “We have all the peering we need.” It is not Policy. surprising that Tier 1 ISPs see the rest of the players While these broad categories of players and their in the Internet Peering Ecosystem players as potential peering policies do not capture all facets of the customers, and do not seek peering with them. In fact, markets, they do provide the broad strokes needed to James Spenceley (Comindico) went through the understand some of the International peering process of negotiating peering with the Tier 1 ISPs in interplay that we will discuss in this paper. Australia and described the Tier 1 peering negotiation tactics in a one word acronym: MILD: Make It Long The rest of this paper focuses on several Asia and Difficult1. This reflects the ISP’s underlying Pacific Peering Ecosystems. First we will start with Peering Inclination, perhaps articulated in their some observations common across the Asia Peering Peering Policy discussed next. Ecosystems, some interesting peering behaviors that we haven’t documented in the research to date. We Peering Policies then finish this section with an overview of four Definition: A Restrictive Peering Policy is an Internet Peering Ecosystems: Japan, Singapore, articulation of an inclination not to peer. A Tier 1 ISP Australia and Hong Kong, highlighting the key may have a posted peering policy indicating that they players, recent trends and disruptions in the peering will peer with ISPs of similar size and scale that meet ecosystems, and the Business Case for Peering in them in a large number of locations in a certain each Peering Ecosystem using recent prices for number of countries with a certain large traffic transport, transit, collocation and Exchange Point volume. In this research, several Tier 2 ISPs have fees. expressed frustration that once they met these stated Editor’s Notes: To illustrate points made in this requirements, the requirements were immediately paper we polled people for estimated prices of local adjusted upwards just out of reach. This demonstrates loops, transit, transpacific transport, etc. All prices the Restrictive Peering Policy underlying foundation - shown are in U.S. Dollars (unless otherwise an inclination not to peer. indicated), and should be assumed to be volatile and Definition: A Selective Peering Policy is an for illustration and comparison purposes only. articulation of an inclination to peer, but with some Example: The Foreign Tier 1 Peering conditions. A Selective Peering Policy details Dynamic prerequisites that must be met, and when met, will generally lead to peering. Some ISPs for example Some International ISPs described the Asia Pacific require multiple interconnect points across a country Peering Ecosystems as “mysterious”, with the only with a minimum amount of traffic in order for it to be discernable behaviors exhibited being those of worth the engineer’s time to set up the peering protection of the domestic market. session. Large Tier 2 ISPs often have Selective “Protection of turf is much stronger in Asia than in Peering Policies; they want to peer, but have a the U.S. or Europe.” – Large European ISP threshold to pass in order for it to be worthwhile. The difference between the Selective and the Restrictive Conversations with both in-country and foreign peering policy is somewhat subjective but is based on Peering Coordinators however reveal that there are the underlying intent; a restrictive peer does not want two sides to this story. This interplay is described to peer with anyone else so sets requirements next as the “Foreign Tier 1 Peering Dynamic.” arbitrarily high such that almost no one is qualified to peer with them. Definition: The Foreign Tier 1 Peering Dynamic occurs when a Tier 1 ISP in one Internet Peering Definition: An Open Peering Policy is an Ecosystem expands into another Internet Peering articulation of an inclination to peer with anyone. Ecosystem and is relegated to a Tier 2 ISP status in Brokaw Price from Yahoo! calls this “pulse peering; that foreign Internet Peering Ecosystem. This dynamic is illustrated in the example figure below, where UUNet (a Tier 1 ISP in the U.S.) 1 James presented this at the APRICOT 2004 Peering Track expanded into Japan in the mid-1990’s. in Kuala Lumpur March 26th. 2 DRAFT The Asia Pacific Internet Peering Guidebook W. B. Norton traffic to Japan, 2) make it easier for NTT to sell access to the UUNet international customer base, 3) pay the cost to haul all of this Japan traffic around the world!2 As a result the UUNet negotiating position is likely to be that they will only bring their Asia Regional routes for peering in Japan, and not their large number of desirable U.S. and European customer routes. Since peering NTTs relatively large number of routes with UUNets relatively small number of regional routes doesn’t make business sense for NTT, the deal is unlikely to go through. Figure 2 - Foreign Tier 1 Peering Dynamic In some cases, the discussion of “reciprocal in- To demonstrate this dynamic, consider this country peering” comes up (you peer with me in your Peering Coordinator’s story. Several years ago over a country and I’ll peer with you in mine), but the dinner in Tokyo, the author was told that “UUNet is negotiations often get mired in definitions and one of the largest ISPs in the world, but we can’t get perceptions of “equal benefits”. It is not surprising peering with any of the Tier 1 ISPs here in Japan, and that these reciprocal peering deals don’t occur very have a hard time even getting Peering with the Tier 2 often. ISPs!” To continue with our example, in this scenario, What is going on here? UUNet also has difficulty getting peering with the Tier 2 ISPs. Let’s look at the incentive/disincentive Understanding the Request for Peering with for the Tier 2 ISPs to peer with this foreign (U.S.- the Foreign Tier 1 ISP.