[11280] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Proposal for CIX membership fees
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Glenn S. Tenney)
Mon Mar 28 08:28:50 1994
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 1994 12:11:13 -0800
To: "Barbara L. Dijker" <barb.dijker@labyrinth.com>
From: tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney)
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
At 11:56 AM 3/27/94 -0700, Barbara L. Dijker wrote:
>Not all ISPs connect _directly_ to the CIX. There is
>absolutly no reason for an ISP to pay $10K a year simply to
>agree to "no settlement" and receive no direct CIX pipe.
>
>Further, it is simply absurd, technically and
>economically, for the CIX to expect or even suggest that
>all ISPs connect to a central point such as the CIX.
This was not my idea. This is the way the CIX is today. My reading of the
current CIX terms is that a member agrees to directly connect to the CIX at
one of the CIX connection points. I'd much rather the CIX simply said that
you could connect any way you want. Of course, if I'm an ISP and connected
to (say) AlterNet (which I could NOT do today, since the last time I
checked they will not allow an ISP to connect to them -- but it may have
changed) that should be adequate. Actually, I think the CIX should
preclude any member from refusing to sell service (ie. connection) to any
other member.
---
Glenn Tenney
tenney@netcom.com Amateur radio: AA6ER
(415) 574-3420 Fax: (415) 574-0546
