[33546] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Favorites (Re: UUNET peering policy)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Tue Jan 16 01:51:20 2001
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@mfnx.net>
Date: 15 Jan 2001 22:49:18 -0800
In-Reply-To: sean@donelan.com's message of "15 Jan 2001 10:38:15 -0800"
Message-ID: <g3bst8f0up.fsf@redpaul.mfnx.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
sean@donelan.com (Sean Donelan) writes:
> > "Favor"? What, precisely, connotes "favor" in this regard?
> > Sending more, or receiving more? And: why?
>
> Which side of the debate do you want to take?
Neither. The argument had better not be about last mile costs, since those
are actually comparable when you count them per bit-mile rather than per
customer. Nor is it about last mile margins, since if someone is charging
$19.95/mo for a service that costs $25.00/mo to provision, then expecting
companies who are less stupid than that to go ahead and do some bizarre kind
of "profit sharing" anyway is just insulting.
I don't see a "favor" being granted here, either by the side who transmits
more, or by the side who receives more. Both sides had better be charging
what it costs them to provide the service, plus some kind of margin to keep
the shareholders in the game. Failing to do this, even if for competitive
reasons, does not create liability against those who manage to do it right.
After all, in an actual "media", the content providers collect money from
the networks who distributed their wares, and those networks then sell the
eyeballs to the highest bidder. Fortunately, the internet isn't a "media".
