[7273] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: peering charges?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric D. Madison)
Mon Jan 27 10:12:38 1997
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:08:38 -0500 (EST)
From: "Eric D. Madison" <madison@queber.acsi.net>
To: Vadim Antonov <avg@pluris.com>
cc: davec@ziplink.net, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199701260754.XAA04317@quest.pluris.com>
Your right on that last comment about market share.. say your MCI and you
have a smaller provider that wants to peer with you, you had rather have
them buy a pipe than let the peer and ride your network for free.
It's all about market share, plain and simple.
Eric
_______________________________________________________
Eric D. Madison - Senior Network Engineer -
ACSI - Advanced Data Services - ATM/IP Backbone Group
24 Hour NMC/NOC (800)291-7889 Email: noc@acsi.net
On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Vadim Antonov wrote:
> Eric D. Madison wrote:
>
> >Since some of the larger vendors (Cisco mostly) has introduced accounting
> >features into their software settlements could start any time.
>
> a) the accounting was there for years, so what
>
> b) a 100-byte packet travelled from provider A to provider B. Should A pay
> to B or vice versa?
>
> So far nobody gave any useful answer to that question.
>
> There are no settlements because traffic has little relevance to relative
> worth of connectivity from one provider to another. The large ISPs are
> generally interested in market share or peers, not in volume of mutual traffic.
>
> --vadim
>
