New Site Promo! (1g on 10g 95 Percentile IP Transit - $250/m) (Available in any of our POPs - 9950x Dedicated Servers Available from $200/m)

IP Transit vs BGP Peering: What’s the Difference?

IP Transit
BGP Peering

Published on: 15/08/2025

Read time: 2

IP Transit vs BGP Peering: What’s the Difference?

When building or expanding a network, two terms you’ll often hear are IP Transit and BGP Peering. They’re both essential parts of how the internet works, but they serve very different purposes.

At Shift Hosting, we provide both IP Transit and BGP Peering solutions, so let’s break down what each one means, how they differ, and when you might need them.

What is IP Transit?

IP Transit is a service where you pay a provider to connect your network to the rest of the internet. Think of it as buying access to every possible destination online.

When you purchase IP Transit:

  • Your provider announces your IP address ranges to the global internet.
  • You receive full routing tables, essentially the “map” of every reachable network.
  • Your traffic is carried across your provider’s backbone and onward to any destination.
  • You usually pay based on bandwidth (e.g., 1Gbps, 10Gbps) and usage.

Key benefits of IP Transit:

  • Global reach – connect to any network worldwide.
  • Simplicity – one provider handles your outbound and inbound traffic.
  • Scalability – easily increase bandwidth as your business grows.

IP Transit is like paying a courier service that can deliver your package anywhere in the world, no matter the destination.

Key benefits of IP Transit:

What is BGP Peering?

BGP Peering is when two networks agree to exchange traffic directly using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)  without going through a third-party transit provider for that traffic.

When you set up BGP Peering:

  • You exchange traffic only for routes that belong to the peering partner.
  • This usually happens at Internet Exchange Points (IXPs).
  • Peering can be settlement-free (no money exchanged) or paid (for premium routes).

Key benefits of BGP Peering:

  • Lower costs – avoid paying transit fees for certain routes.
  • Lower latency – direct connections mean faster delivery times.
  • Better control – you decide how and where your traffic flows.

Example analogy: BGP Peering is like having a private road between two towns — faster, cheaper, and more direct than going via the motorway.

IP Transit vs BGP Peering: Side-by-Side

Feature

IP Transit

BGP Peering

Purpose

Global internet access

Direct route to specific networks

Cost model

Paid per bandwidth/usage

Often free or low cost

Reach

Entire internet

Only peer’s network & customers

Best for

Full connectivity

Cost savings & low latency routes

Setup

Simple, one provider

Requires agreements with peers

Which One Should You Use?

Most businesses and network operators use a combination of both:

  • IP Transit provides guaranteed connectivity to the entire internet.
  • BGP Peering reduces costs and improves performance for specific traffic flows.

At Shift Hosting, we can help design a blended connectivity strategy so you get the best of both worlds. Whether you’re an ISP, data centre, or enterprise looking for network efficiency, we’ll recommend the right balance for your needs.

Why Choose Shift Hosting for IP Transit & BGP Peering?

  • High-performance network with multiple upstream providers.
  • Direct peering relationships with key networks for lower latency.
  • Scalable bandwidth from 1Gbps up to 100Gbps+.
  • 24/7 support from our expert team.

Ready to optimize your network? Contact Shift Hosting today to discuss IP Transit and BGP Peering options tailored to your business.

Recommended Blogs

Inside an IP Transit Blend: Why Route Diversity Beats a Single “Tier-1”

Inside an IP Transit Blend: Why Route Diversity Beats a Single “Tier-1”

When businesses evaluate IP transit, one of the most common assumptions is that a single Tier-1 provider automatically guarantees the best performance. On paper, that logic sounds convincing. Tier-1 carriers operate massive global backbones, maintain settlement-free peering, and advertise full internet routing tables. But real-world networking is more nuanced than marketing labels. In practice, a carefully engineered IP transit blend combining multiple upstream providers almost always delivers

Inside the NOC: How Networks Stay Up While You Sleep

Inside the NOC: How Networks Stay Up While You Sleep

Most people only think about networks when a page will not load or a service goes down. For the teams in a Network Operations Center (NOC), the whole goal is to make sure those moments almost never happen. While you sleep, watch streams, push code, or run your business, NOC engineers are quietly watching graphs, logs, and alerts, making sure backbones, IP transit, and data center links behave the way they should. Their success is measured in boredom: nothing catches fire, nothing surprises custo

Why Backbone Capacity Numbers Matter: 10G, 100G, 400G and Multi‑Tbit Claims

Why Backbone Capacity Numbers Matter: 10G, 100G, 400G and Multi‑Tbit Claims

Backbone capacity numbers like 10G, 100G, 400G and “multi‑terabit” are everywhere in network marketing, but they are often poorly explained. They sound powerful, yet it is not always clear what they mean in practice or whether they represent real, usable capacity across the network. Understanding these numbers and how they fit together helps you choose providers, compare offers, and see through vague “massive backbone” language. How 10G, 100G and 400G Build a Backbone Modern backbones are bui

Cloud vs Colocation: How Startups Take Back Cost Control

Cloud vs Colocation: How Startups Take Back Cost Control

Serious startups outgrow cloud‑only faster than most founders expect. Early on, the cloud feels perfect: swipe a card, get servers in minutes, and forget about power, cooling, and network design. As usage grows, you start paying not only for resources but for someone else’s margin stack, routing choices, and limitations, and that’s when colocation plus dedicated IP transit starts to look like a way to take back control of cost, performance, and reliability. The Hidden Limits of Cloud‑Only Clo