[7290] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: peering charges?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jon Zeeff)
Mon Jan 27 16:05:50 1997
From: jon@branch.net (Jon Zeeff)
To: paul@vix.com (Paul A Vixie)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:25:07 -0500 (EST)
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199701272007.MAA16897@wisdom.home.vix.com> from "Paul A Vixie" at Jan 27, 97 12:07:08 pm
> to ours" into "we'll be happy to peer with you but be aware that we only send
> local routes when we peer at public exchanges, and if you want a full routing
> exchange it'll take 6 T3's worth of private peering -- can you afford it?"
This sounds like the right approach, although I'd add some flexibility
that makes everything in between possible. Ie, if you peer at one NAP,
then you get some percentage of the peers routes. If you are at all NAPS, then
you get 100%.
> I think the network will work better and scale better when this kind of
> "peering" becomes the norm. If wide area telecom costs are the reason big
> guys don't like to peer with little guys, then by gum let's see peering and
> charging all take place exactly where the economics require it.
