[11402] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
No subject found in mail header
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anonymous)
Thu Mar 31 16:26:04 1994
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 94 11:59:45 -0500
From: Anonymous <nowhere@bsu-cs.bsu.edu>
To: com-priv@psi.com
Subject; Questionable commercial connections
nabil@world.net (Aaron Nabil) writes:
>Caveat: I've removed the CIX members *I* know of, and any obvious end-users
>the Sprint is providing transit for. I've also ordered them in roughly what
>I consider to be from most to least likely. This list specifically does not
>include direct sprintlink IP (ie, the end user is in Sprintlink's AS).
Personally, I don't know why you waste time worrying about this when there
are commercial providers with much more questionable connections. We pay
for our pipe from a commercial provider and are risking the CIX routing
issue. I know of providers who are scamming their connections from .edu
sites, getting a free or cheaper ride for their traffic instead of buying a
real commercial connection pipe. If the commercial IP world (including
CIX) is losing out if anything its through that practise. Personally I
don't think the government should fund or subsidize any pipes but only be
a customer like any other (if perhaps larger), and let the market deal with
providing the pipes in the most efficient manner (if ISPs can rationally
cooperate in their own interest to do so).
Oh, and I think there may even be CIX members in this category, where all
of their traffic is going through .edu routes no matter where it is headed,
and it seems like the govt. is essentially not giving ISPs a level playing
field by playing favorites even at the local ISP level (obviously at the
national level there are issues to be resolved, but at the local level
there isn't a reason for this).
