Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Is physical location or peering more important for speed?
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Is physical location or peering more important for speed?

If you have the option to choose between a provider that has servers in your city but no direct peering with major ISPs (peering with provider 2, though) vs a provider that's 150km away but has direct peering with the 3 major ISPs, which would you choose for performance? Assuming every access to the website would be from the physical location of provider 1 (max 5km radius)

Comments

  • crunchbitscrunchbits Member, Patron Provider, Top Host
    edited December 2023

    @siemens said:
    If you have the option to choose between a provider that has servers in your city but no direct peering with major ISPs (peering with provider 2, though) vs a provider that's 150km away but has direct peering with the 3 major ISPs, which would you choose for performance? Assuming every access to the website would be from the physical location of provider 1 (max 5km radius)

    This issue is common where I live (and our main office is). Almost every single provider will peer and/or backhaul all traffic approx 300mi away to Seattle, WA. Unfortunately, a lot of ISPs just won't even bother peering outside of a major IX.

    It would probably come down to specifics like what physical path are they taking (if a different one) and how congested their peering ports/links are, etc. I would assume either way all your traffic has to transit 150km away to provider 2 anyways (and then onto their peering), so it is probably better to go to the provider that peers in-house rather than rely on a provider that is 2 degrees of separation away assuming all else is equal. That is if I understood correctly and your ISP (or all local ISPs) only peer with provider 2 and you are talking about performance originated on said ISPs from physical location of provider 1

    Thanked by 1siemens
  • edited December 2023

    Unless your application is very latency sensitive I would say peering. Especially if that means they have more redundancy in their peering arrangements (multiple physical connectivity rather than most/all that peering happening down a potential single-point-of-failure). As well as being better for reliability if you are looking at that over speed, better physical layer redundancy increases the change they'll be able to maintain the speed during a fault situation with them or one of their peering partners.

    Thanked by 1siemens
  • @crunchbits said: That is if I understood correctly and your ISP (or all local ISPs) only peer with provider 2 and you are talking about performance originated on said ISPs from physical location of provider 1

    Yes, exactly, all major ISPs peer with provider 2 in the capital but all customers are in the small city where provider 1, which doesn't peer with with any ISPs, is.

    Thanks!

Sign In or Register to comment.