Re: Peering Policy ( was Re: AGIS/DIGEX )

[owen () DeLong SJ CA US (Owen DeLong)]

> So far from what I have gathered, everyone is afraid of being used as a
> transit point. There is a very simple solution available which I can't
> figure out why people are not using. 
>
> Both peers charge each other for the bits being peered. So now if one
> peer is being used as a transit point, then they get compensated for it. 
>
> Eg
>
> AAA               BBB
> 15443621 bits ->  15443621 bits
> 20000000 bits <-  20000000 bits
This is not simple or correct.  For example, we host MicroSoft's download site
for Internet Explorer.  Should we pay the price for all the bits we deliver
to AAA in response to AAA's customers requests for Internet Explorer?  I don't
think so.

> Difference 4556379 bits additional sent from BBB to AAA
>
> Applying lets say 1 cent per  100 bit charge, AAA gets $455.64 from BBB
>
> Simple!!!!
>
> Now with this kind of peering arrangement, no one has to be worried about
> being used as a transit point -- infact they will want to be used as a
> transit point. 
Why heck, it would even make the $5/month personal accounts proffitable,
as you would get reimbursed by all the ISP's your customers download from.

> This will also allow medium sized ISPs to peer with each-other. 
>
> So here is my question -- why is this kind of arrangement not being used
> anywhere???
Because it's a broken idea.

> Pritish
Owen

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -