<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: #000000'><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">PNIs need backups. Unlike most data, voice cares about latency, so if your Ashburn PNI fails, now you're routing via Dallas (for instance), which may be an unacceptable increase in latency, jitter, packet loss, etc.</span></font><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">With SIP re-invite being fairly common, just because you have a PNI for your signaling doesn't mean your RTP follows the same path.</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><br></div><div><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"><span style="font-size: 13.3333px;">NTT/Telia/Lumen/etc. won't peer with you over an IX because the traffic volumes to qualify for peering are enormous and usually inappropriate for IXes. Well, that and protectionism. Also, for them, the Internet *IS* the product. For a voice provider, the product is the voice service, the Internet is incidental. The primary concern of IP peering for voice providers is of data integrity, not cost avoidance.</span></font><br><br><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><span name="x"></span><br><br>-----<br>Mike Hammett<br>Intelligent Computing Solutions<br>http://www.ics-il.com<br><br><br><br>Midwest Internet Exchange<br>http://www.midwest-ix.com<br><br><span name="x"></span><br></div><br><hr id="zwchr" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; text-decoration: none;"><b>From: </b>"Ross Tajvar" <ross@tajvar.io><br><b>To: </b>"Mike Hammett" <voiceops@ics-il.net><br><b>Cc: </b>"Paul Timmins" <paul@timmins.net>, "VoiceOps" <voiceops@voiceops.org><br><b>Sent: </b>Monday, September 27, 2021 1:38:32 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [VoiceOps] Bandwidth East Coast Issues<br><br><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Sun, Sep 26, 2021 at 5:24 PM Mike Hammett <<a href="mailto:voiceops@ics-il.net" target="_blank">voiceops@ics-il.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">I have IXes in areas where Inteliquent and Peerless have POPs. They haven't had any interest.<div><br></div><div>I don't understand.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div> I understand. Serious customers will pay for a PNI. Industry partners (other large telcos with whom they exchange a lot of traffic) will get a PNI because it is more reliable/higher bandwidth/etc. An IX presence may help customers who send voice traffic over the internet, but I suspect those customers make up a small percentage of any given telco's revenue. So, there's no incentive. Same reason NTT/Telia/Lumen/etc. won't peer with you over an IX. Why would they, when they can sell you transit?</div></div></div>
</div><br></div></div></body></html>