[86298] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Tue Nov 1 10:05:03 2005
In-Reply-To: <7A5F480A-C2A3-4865-9269-34AA3A63CC9C@ianai.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2005 10:04:01 -0500
To: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
From: John Curran <jcurran@mail.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
At 9:40 AM -0500 11/1/05, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>
>I think everyone agrees that unbalanced ratios can create a situation where one side pays more than the other. However, assuming something can be used to keep the costs equal (e.g. cold-potato?),
Cold-potato only addresses the long-haul; there's still cost on the receiving network
even if its handed off at the closest interconnect to the final destination(s).
> I do not see how one network can tell another: "You can't send me what my customers are requesting of you."
Depeering seems to say exactly that, no?
>If your business model is to provide flat-rate access, it is not _my_ responsibility to ensure your customers do not use more access than your flat-rate can compensate you to deliver.
Agreed... I'm not defending the business model, only pointing out that some folks may find it easier to bill their "peers" than customers.
/John
