Private Peering Among Internet Backbone Providers

We develop a model, in which Internet backbone providers decide on private peering agreements, comparing the benefits of private peering relative to being connected only through National Access Points. Backbone providers compete by setting capacities for their networks, capacities on the private peering links, if they choose to peer privately, and access prices. The model is formulated as a multistage game. We examine the model from two alternative modelling perspectives - a purely non-cooperative game, where we solve for Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibria through backward induction, and a network theoretic perspective, where we examine pairwise stable and efficient networks. While there are a large number of Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibria, both the pairwise stable and the efficient network are unique and the stable network is not efficient and vice versa. The stable network is the complete network, where all the backbone providers choose to peer with each other, while the efficient network is the one, where the backbone providers are connected to each other only through the National Access Points.Subgame perfect Nash equilibrium, networks, pairwise stability, efficiency

Private Peering Among Internet Backbone Providers

We develop a model, in which Internet backbone providers decide on private peering agreements, comparing the benefits of private peering relative to being connected only through National Access Points. Backbone providers compete by setting capacities for their networks, capacities on the private peering links, if they choose to peer privately, and access prices. The model is formulated as a multistage game. We examine the model from two alternative modelling perspectives - a purely non-cooperative game, where we solve for Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibria through backward induction, and a network theoretic perspective, where we examine pairwise stable and efficient networks. While there are a large number of Subgame Perfect Nash Equilibria, both the pairwise stable and the efficient network are unique and the stable network is not efficient and vice versa. The stable network is the complete network, where all the backbone providers choose to peer with each other, while the efficient network is the one, where the backbone providers are connected to each other only through the National Access Points.Subgame perfect Nash equilibrium, networks, pairwise stability, efficiency

Intra-backbone and Inter-backbone Peering Among Internet Service Providers

We consider a model with two backbones and a finite number of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) connected to the backbones. ISPs decide on private peering agreements, comparing the benefits of private peering to costs. Intra-backbone peering refers to peering between ISPs connected to the same backbone, whereas inter-backbone peering refers to peering between ISPs connected to different backbones. We formulate the model as a two-stage game. In the first stage, ISPs decide on peering agreements. In the second stage they compete in prices a la Bertrand. We examine the effects of peering on profits of ISPs. Peering affects profits through two channels - reduction of backbone congestion which we call the symmetric effect and ability to send traffic bypassing or circumventing congested backbones which we call the asymmetric effect. The first has a negative or ambiguous effect while the second has a generally positive effect on firm profits. The two often act against each other making the net effect ambiguous. We also conduct simulations to determine pairwise stable peering configurations in a six-provider model and find that there is a paucity of inter-backbone peering in asymmetric settings.Peering, Networks

Intra-backbone and Inter-backbone Peering Among Internet Service Providers

We consider a model with two backbones and a finite number of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) connected to the backbones. ISPs decide on private peering agreements, comparing the benefits of private peering to costs. Intra-backbone peering refers to peering between ISPs connected to the same backbone, whereas inter-backbone peering refers to peering between ISPs connected to different backbones. We formulate the model as a two-stage game. In the first stage, ISPs decide on peering agreements. In the second stage they compete in prices a la Bertrand. We examine the effects of peering on profits of ISPs. Peering affects profits through two channels - reduction of backbone congestion which we call the symmetric effect and ability to send traffic bypassing or circumventing congested backbones which we call the asymmetric effect. The first has a negative or ambiguous effect while the second has a generally positive effect on firm profits. The two often act against each other making the net effect ambiguous. We also conduct simulations to determine pairwise stable peering configurations in a six-provider model and find that there is a paucity of inter-backbone peering in asymmetric settings.Peering, Networks

The economic impact of broadband deployment in Kentucky

Significant resources are being invested by government and the private sector in broadband infrastructure to increase broadband deployment and use. With a unique dataset of broadband availability (sorted by county), the authors assess whether broadband infrastructure has affected the industrial competitiveness of Kentucky counties. Their results suggest that broadband availability increases employment growth in some industries but not others.Economic development ; Kentucky

A simple game-theoretic analysis of peering and transit contracting among Internet service providers

The paper presents a simple game-theoretic model of two Internet service providers (ISPs), drawn from a larger set consisting of Tiers-1 and -2 ISPs, who choose between peering and transit agreements. The study focuses on the costs of interconnection taking into account traffic imbalances. The analysis suggests that if the traffic flows and the costs of interconnection are fairly shared, the provider's peer, otherwise they choose transit. Moreover, the joint profits are maximized under the transit arrangement.Peering Transit Bilateral Nash Equilibrium

Middlemen in Peer-to-Peer Networks: Stability and Efficiency

A fundamental tension of between the e#ciency and stability of social networks is now a well recognized fact in the literature. In general, networks are not simultaneously e#cient and stable. Here we consider strongly pairwise stable networks and identify that the presence of middlemen is of particular importance for such a network to be e#cient as well. We find that for the component wise egalitarian rule there is no conflict between the e#cient and stable networks when these middlemen have no incentive to break up the network