[86254] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (JC Dill)
Fri Oct 28 17:46:40 2005
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 14:45:55 -0700
From: JC Dill <lists05@equinephotoart.com>
Reply-To: nanog@merit.edu
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <C4232CC8-259D-40CE-BF71-7DE09EB414A6@semihuman.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Christopher Woodfield wrote:
>
> "...the companies have agreed to the settlement-free exchange of
> traffic subject to specific payments if certain obligations are not met."
>
> So it does look like Cogent bent somwhat...I'm guessing they agreed to
> pay some sort of "traffic imbalance fee"?
There are other possibilities.
Maybe they agreed to pay a transit fee should they fail to carry the L3
user's requested traffic as far as possible before handing it off (cold
potato routing) and hand it off at the earliest possibility (hot potato
routing) leaving L3 to backhaul it across the L3 network to the user who
requested the data.
Etc.
jc
