[52770] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [Re: the cost of carrying routes]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joshua Smith)
Tue Oct 15 07:47:36 2002
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 07:46:53 -0400
From: Joshua Smith <joshua.ej.smith@usa.net>
To: Ratul Mahajan <ratul@cs.washington.edu>, <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Ratul Mahajan <ratul@cs.washington.edu> wrote:
> =
> =
> i have related question to ron's (a bit hypothetical but interesting
> nonetheless).
> =
> if isps charged for bgp announcements, would the number of announcement=
s
> that shouldn't be made (e.g., those due to configuration errors and poo=
r
> operational practices) go down?
> =
> -- ratul
they could probably make some good money if they also charged for 'leaky'=
networks - however, i think the sentiment amongst their customers would
not be favorable (you charge for misconfigurations? some nerve you have)=
it is probably one of those long term goals that you will almost never be=
able to convince the powers-that-be of undertaking. i know i am having
a very difficult time convincing management that our network needs some
help - although after several recent, fairly successful attacks, they are=
starting to listen.
joshua
> =
> --------------
> =
> On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Ron da Silva wrote:
> =
> > =
> > =
> > Some ISPs charge for actual bits carried (peak usage, actual count,
> > whatever) in addition to or instead of per port/circuit charges.
> > =
> > Do any ISPs charge based on the number of announcements a customer
> > advertises?
> > =
> > If downstream advertisements became mainly smaller prefixes (say /24)=
> > that were not aggregatable by you as their upstream ISP, would you
> > answer the above question differently?
> > =
> > -ron
> > =
> =
"Walk with me through the Universe,
And along the way see how all of us are Connected.
Feast the eyes of your Soul,
On the Love that abounds.
In all places at once, seemingly endless,
Like your own existence."
- Stephen Hawking -
