[118879] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Peering in Latin America
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (isabel dias)
Sun Nov 1 13:49:34 2009
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 10:48:50 -0800 (PST)
From: isabel dias <isabeldias1@yahoo.com>
To: mvh@hosteurope.de
In-Reply-To: <4AEDA1F9.6080906@hosteurope.de>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Just depends of the policy based billing /billing models in place.=A0If "bi=
lling" is seen as a service=A0the common denominator is the charge the port=
otherwise a variety of other elements.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A----- Original Messag=
e ----=0AFrom: Malte von dem Hagen <mvh@hosteurope.de>=0ATo: isabel dias <i=
sabeldias1@yahoo.com>=0ACc: Mike Lyon <mike.lyon@gmail.com>; Ken Gilmour <k=
en.gilmour@gmail.com>; "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>=0ASent: Sun, Nov=
ember 1, 2009 2:58:01 PM=0ASubject: Re: Peering in Latin America=0A=0AG'day=
,=0A=0AAm 01.11.2009 13:24 Uhr schrieb isabel dias:=0A> peering in the IX's=
a.k.a peering -> unless is a payed service =3Dprivate-peering! at the exch=
ange=0A=0Adespite full sentences are clearly better to understand, the term=
"_private_=0Apeering" does not necessarily include payments. It just means=
that the=0Ainterconnect is not realized via a _public_ infrastructure as a=
n IX's network=0Ae.g., but via _discrete_ p2p links, for example.=0A=0APaid=
services are often referred to as "transit" or sometimes even "transit=0Al=
ight" (meaning "my network and the ones of my customers", german Telekom us=
es=0Athis) or explicitly "_paid_ peering" (which is a misuse of the word pe=
ering,=0Aimho, as e.g. used by Arcor/Vodafone).=0A=0AAt least over here the=
nomenclature is like that ;-)=0A=0AKind regards,=0A=0A.m=0A=0A=0A
