[11360] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The whole CIX concept is flawed
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Glenn S. Tenney)
Wed Mar 30 10:16:50 1994
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 1994 00:14:49 -0800
To: karl@mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
From: tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney)
Cc: com-priv@lists.psi.com
At 1:08 AM 3/30/94 -0600, Karl Denninger wrote:
>> hmmm... The CIX agreement reads:
>> 6. Member will provide a circuit, at its own expense,
>> from a location of its choice to a CIX router selected
>> by mutual agreement, or other topologies and
>> implementations specified by the Board of Directors.
>
>A passthrough connection <IS> a circuit, provided at the member's expense,
>to a CIX router selected by mutual agreement of all parties involved. :-)
>
>It doesn't say <DIRECT> circuit.
Hey, they seem to accept whatever you want when you pay your $10K, but when
I see the words above "a circuit to a CIX router" I would only read it to
mean TO A CIX ROUTER, not to someone else's router thence to the net as a
whole. So, if you go through Alternet or someone else, then all of your
packets go from there to the CIX router and THEN back out to the net?
Yeah, right! That's really good use of resources...
If that's what the CIX meant, then why didn't they say it. The way it is
written perhaps may be a reason why some people aren't signing up -- they
think they have to get to a CIX router.
You know, Karl, no matter what anyone says you always twist it to suit your
situation... Sigh... Let's just agree that everything you want it to be
is the way it is to you, and the way everyone else sees it is different.
---
Glenn Tenney
tenney@netcom.com Amateur radio: AA6ER
(415) 574-3420 Fax: (415) 574-0546
