[11480] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The whole CIX concept is flawed
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Karl Denninger)
Mon Apr 4 03:50:30 1994
From: karl@mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
To: avg@sprint.net (Vadim Antonov)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 1994 22:53:43 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: bzs@world.std.com, jlw@cs.columbia.edu, bilse@eu.net, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <199404030554.AAA04457@titan.sprintlink.net> from "Vadim Antonov" at Apr 3, 94 00:54:50 am
> The real problem with CIX is that their policy is technically
> cannot be enforced. Since IP is based on destination-only routing
> decisions if i route to some networks thru CIX i have to route
> packets this way for *all* my customers.
This is simply not true. I can refuse a route for any particular IP number,
and poof -- no transit through me. I can also block traffic from any source
address (or set thereof) that I choose, but that is much more antisocial,
as it gives you no route to an alternative path if one is available.
> That's why MAE-East and D-GIX project are based on level-2
> interconnectivity and *do not* discriminate between indirectly
> reacheable networks.
>
> As it stands CIX is a perfect example of politics ignoring technical
> laws.
See above.
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.COM) | MCSNet - Full Internet Connectivity (shell,
Modem: [+1 312 248-0900] | PPP, SLIP and more) in Chicago and 'burbs.
Voice/FAX: [+1 312 248-8649] | Email "info@mcs.com". MCSNet is a CIX member.
