[11336] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
re: All CIX members are equal redux
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anonymous)
Tue Mar 29 18:53:40 1994
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 94 11:19:10 -0500
From: Anonymous <nowhere@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>
To: com-priv@psi.com
Sean Doran <smd@cesium.clock.org> writes:
>There is also an obvious non-legal issue, and that involves
>what has been argued back and forth on com-priv for the last
>several days, viz. the CIX loses out economically when ANS
>CO+RE's gateway customers suddenly get free CIX routing while
>SprintLink's equivalents have to join the CIX and pay $10000.
Does ANS get paid by CIX members? If not then, wouldn't ANS "loose out" by
CIX members getting routing to ANS CO+RE customers and not paying ANS? If
we allow traffic from CIX to come through to our customers, can we start
charging CIX so we don't "lose out economically"?
If SprintLink is a CIX member, and pays for the actual physical
connection, then why should any SprintLink customer need to pay? We'd tell
CIX we'll cut off traffic from them if they don't pay us $10k/year, except
I don't think they'd go for it. What is the difference, aside from the fact
that they can get away with it????
