[19068] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Generation of traffic in "settled" peering arrangement
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adrian Chadd)
Tue Aug 25 21:10:46 1998
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 23 Aug 1998 01:26:33 -0400."
<3.0.3.32.19980823012633.017e1f04@127.0.0.1>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 09:04:44 +0800
From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@creative.net.au>
>p.s. The fact that the sender of traffic should be paying some portion
> of the resulting costs is not a surprise to anyone; many of the
> content companies that I've spoken to believe they already are
> paying more as traffic increases, and were quite surprised to
> find that it doesn't actually make it to the networks which
> bear the brunt of the traffic carriage.
Why don't you just resort to a bit-counting method that I suggested earlier
for settlement peering, and make the *SENDER* carry the traffic to the
'local' destination ?
That way, the sender has to build a large enough network to distribute its
traffic to the destination networks, without just presenting at one network
point and expecting destination networks to foot the inter-state / inter-country
traffic ..
?
Adrian
