[43235] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Verio Peering Question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alex Bligh)
Tue Oct 2 18:40:41 2001
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 23:36:11 +0100
From: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Reply-To: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
To: "John A. Tamplin" <jat@liveonthenet.com>,
Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu, Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Message-ID: <134097938.1002065771@[195.224.237.69]>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.A32.3.91.1011002163706.22300D-100000@cyclone.liveonthenet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, Alex Bligh wrote:
>
>> Absolutely, assuming UUnet were willing to peer with you, and at that
>> rate for route exchange. Terms to be negotiated in the free market.
>
> In that case, we already have the system in place. It just turns out
> that the negotiated rate per prefix is $0.
Or 'not at any price' in the case of refused peerings. Or at $$$
in the case of paid for peerings. And with no distinction drawn
between length/usefulness/CIDRity of prefixes. However, it has
been suggested that the ternary nature of this relationship
is insufficiently granular for people to exchange the routes
they want.
--
Alex Bligh
Personal Capacity
