[11484] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The whole CIX concept is flawed
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Glenn S. Tenney)
Mon Apr 4 07:46:51 1994
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 1994 00:40:01 -0800
To: com-priv@psi.com
From: tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney)
At 10:53 PM 4/3/94 -0500, Karl Denninger wrote:
>... I can refuse a route for any particular IP number,
>and poof -- no transit through me. ...
Which raises a question or two...
When someone joins the CIX, how long is it before every other CIX member is
told?
If I were to sign up for a direct connection with some other CIX member
ISP, but wanted to keep my IP address that was previously assigned (that's
a different question, and could raise strange routing problems, but...), or
wanted to use one of my own, how would you know that my IP address was that
of a direct customer of another CIX member?
It would seem either it would take a while for new CIX member info to
percolate to everyone, or that you'd have no way of knowing that the IP
address in question was "legit". If you, as a CIX member, did refuse to
route in either of those cases, then wouldnt you be in violation of the CIX
agreement?
I would think that unless the CIX as an entity says "Ok, refuse to block
this IP number, it's not legit" any CIX member would be walking on thin
ice. Of course, then the CIX itself might be on thin ice for taking the
action of telling it's members to refuse to route someone...
---
Glenn Tenney
tenney@netcom.com Amateur radio: AA6ER
(415) 574-3420 Fax: (415) 574-0546
