Re: UUNET peering policy

[Jeff.Hodges () kingsmountain com]

Folks here may find the below interesting. also available here..

  http://www.interesting-people.org/200101/0015.html


JeffH
-----

Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 16:01:33 -0500
To: ip-sub-1 () majordomo pobox com
From: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
Subject: IP: A watershed event has occurred with no fanfare...
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-ip-sub-1 () admin listbox com
Precedence: list
Reply-To: farber () cis upenn edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Content-Length: 2706


> Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 13:41:14 -0700
> From: Rodney Joffe <rjoffe () centergate com>
> To: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
> Subject: A watershed event has occurred with no fanfare...
>
> Hello Dave,
>
> As you probably know from your time at the FCC, as well as your earlier
> 'net history, probably the most controversial and secretive subject
> relating the the true backbone, and infrastructure of the Internet, has
> been that of peering and peering relationships. For clarification,
> peering in the Internet sense is the exchange of traffic between two
> networks without filtering, limitation, or fee.
>
> As the founder of the original Genuity, in 1993-4 I was the last of the
> networks to be party to the multi-lateral peering agreement that made
> the commercial Internet work. From that moment on, it became virtually
> impossible for anyone else to connect and exchange traffic with the rest
> of the Internet without paying a transit or traffic fee to someone else.
> The whole subject became mired in obfuscation and secrecy, and over the
> next 7 years, the company that everyone needed to peer with but no new
> company could was UUNet (now Worldcom/MCI/UUNet). Even with the other
> major networks at the time (Sprint, MCI, BBN, AT&T, IBM etc.) this was
> difficult, because the secret sauce seemed to be finding out what a
> given network's peering requirement was, and then meeting those
> requirements. And no major network ever published it's requirement.
>
> The requirement was generally political, but articulated in some vague
> technical specification (e.g. to be present at 5 public exchange points,
> with a point-to-point clear channel T3 between all points, and at least
> one redundant path between any two exchange points, etc.).
>
> So the rest of the Internet industry basically gave up on ever being
> able to join the chosen few who peered at the center of the Internet
> without paying any form of settlement fees.
>
> Then, apparently in the last few days, a clear statement on peering
> policy and requirements has appeared on the UUNet website - see
> http://www.uu.net/peering/ This is a remarkable document in that for the
> very first time ever, in a public form, it sets standards for
> settlement-free (i.e. no charge) peering with UUnet, the world's largest
> Internet network.
>
> If I understand the document correctly, anyone who meets their clear
> requirements will be able to exchange traffic with them at no charge.
>
> This will undoubtedly change the landscape of the Internet.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Rodney Joffe
> CenterGate Research Group, LLC.
> http://www.centergate.com
> "Technology so advanced, even we don't understand it!"(SM)



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/

------- End of Forwarded Message