[nixgeek]

As a small ISP you definitely can peer and many do, you just aren’t going to get settlement-free peering with any of the big eyeball networks like Comcast.

Something like Seattle IX is a good example of where lots of peering sessions could be established (although I haven’t looked at Jared’s ASN in any detail to see where it’s present).

https://www.seattleix.net/home

Any traffic you’re able to offload via peering you wouldn’t be paying an IP transit to haul, so it’s worth seeing if networks like Netflix are on the Route Servers (https://www.ams-ix.net/ams/documentation/ams-ix-route-server...) at any IX nearby your network, seeing if you can negotiate a session over the IX even if they don’t participate in the RS, or seeing if you can do PNI (sling a cable between your networks in a facility you’re both located in).

Edit: Jared’s on Detroit IX. https://www.peeringdb.com/net/20268

[2Gkashmiri]

Wait. The poster above said in point 1 to buy a line,1G, 10g depending on your upstream seller. Why do you need peering then?

If I have 1Gbps line for example and 10 users each are using equal amount 100% of time, it shouldn't matter they send the data to Alaska or Russia or Australia ? Or does it?

Do you buy the pipe and the data itself also?

[icedchai]

You don't "need" peering but it offloads your upstream (transit) links, which are generally much more expensive. In the old days, I worked for couple ISPs and we typically had 3 or 4 upstreams (generally UUNet, Sprint, MCI...) This was back when a T1 was still considered fast.

[toast0]

> Any traffic you’re able to offload via peering you wouldn’t be paying an IP transit to haul

When you're small enough, the difference in price between transit and what it takes to get you to an IX is likely to be pretty small. But, you probably want to be at an IX sooner or later anyway (easier to get multiple transit offers at an IX than on the side of the road), so might as well peer while you're there.