[11016] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: ANS and the CIX - have they really connected?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Karl Denninger)
Fri Mar 18 03:57:40 1994
From: karl@mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
To: cook@path.net (Gordon Cook)
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 1994 00:01:17 -0600 (CST)
Cc: stpeters@dawn.crd.ge.com, fair@apple.com, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <9403171345.aa21895@pandora.sf.ca.us> from "Gordon Cook" at Mar 17, 94 01:45:42 pm
>
> OK..... I just received what looks to be an authentic CIX membership list
> that was up-to-date as of late January 94. The list shows THIRTY members.
> 23 US, one canadian, and six European or Asian.
>
> Could it be that if a network service provider has peering arrangements
> with other networks, that such a provider may join the CIX and say to the
> CIX my prior arrangements with ABC net and XYZ net require me to extend to
> them all routing that is extended to me? Therefore when I join the CIX, I
> *MUST* extend CIX routing to them. Thus we get some idea of the hordes
> who appear to have CIX routing while only 30 have paid the fee??????
You can extend routing to them, yes.
However, no other members have to accept those routes, or pass packets
from them.
Again, the CIX agreement does not say you CANNOT pass "backdoor" traffic.
It also doesn't say that you must.
It does, however, say that you will route traffic for direct customers of
members. That's a duty of membership, as the agreement reads today.
Other providers may have their own policies. Some permit pipe resale, and
some of those with conditions (ie: Sprintnet as long as you are a CIX
member) and some prohibit it outright.
However, routing via the CIX without a membership for customers can be a
bad idea. What are you going to do if one or more of the CIX members start
refusing your traffic, or propose to charge you a settlement in order to
accept it? You have <zero> recourse in that case, whereas if you have a
CIX membership the agreement says that direct customer traffic will be
routed without settlements.
How many of these individual agreements with the providers around the world
do you wish to negotiate? 30 of them? That's what it comes down to in
fact, unless you take a membership yourself -- in which case the number is
zero -- at least within the members of the CIX.
> I am getting the impression that when it comes to setting policy that there
> is a lack of unity among the members of the CIX Board.
>
>This is unfortunate for let me make it clear that I support what I understand to
> be the mission and role of the CIX.
The CIX can only work if providers who are members act in a fashion that
favors its continued existance. I happen to think that the model, while
not perfect, is a damn sight better than the alternative :-)
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.COM) | MCSNet - Full Internet Connectivity (shell,
Modem: [+1 312 248-0900] | PPP, SLIP and more) in Chicago and 'burbs.
Voice/FAX: [+1 312 248-8649] | Email "info@mcs.com". MCSNet is a CIX member.
