[11357] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Practical questions, CIX vs. GIX vs. other CIXs elsewhere
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anonymous)
Wed Mar 30 06:54:39 1994
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 94 11:43:38 -0500
From: Anonymous <nowhere@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>
To: com-priv@psi.com
Morten Reistad <mrr@galba.boers.no> writes:
>And, yes, there are alternatives. There is a GIX on the
>drawingboard, the Washington part is operational, and
>several national CIX'es. (There is one here in Norway,
>where four providers hook up to exchange packets and
>routing). I would very much like to see a CIX or GIX present in
>Northern Europe somewhere.
Is this GIX a government internet exchange, or another commercial internet
exchange? If it is commercial, does this mean we are going to need to pay
GIX as well as CIX to get them to route our traffic? Or is GIX going to pay
CIX or vice versa? If a CIX2 starts, will we need to pay them as well? Will
we need to join each of these national CIXs or they'll refuse to route our
traffic? We buy a pipe through a reseller, who connects to CIX, etc. Why do
we need to start paying people elsewhere on the net other than the place we
directly connect to??? If we do, who do we need to pay?? Does this model
make sense, shouldn't we only pay the place we directly connect to
otherwise things can get quickly out of hand??
BTW, I notice messages on the list also addressed to nowhere, I should warn
people that this anonymous remailer won't return replies to me, all the
discussion needs to be on the list. (I know there is anon.penet.fi, but it
was bogged down over the weekend and I didn't get the help instructions
back for a long time and used this instead).
