[12246] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Superhighway & Denver Airport
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Doug Luce)
Wed May 11 09:39:31 1994
Date: Wed, 11 May 1994 04:12:56 +0400 (EDT)
From: Doug Luce <doug@telerama.lm.com>
To: "Joseph W. Stroup" <nettech@crl.com>
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.87.9405062128.A28928-0100000@crl.crl.com>
This is from item 9 of the CIX member agreement, as found on their FTP
site:
"...any Member shall be able ... to allow interconnectivity between
indirect customers through CIX or other networks...."
The other portions of that item lead me to believe that CIX membership
requires one to offer their direct customers access to other CIX member's
direct customers (i.e. no broad filtering of other CIX member's direct
customers), but places no restrictions on indirect customer traffic. I.e.
a CIX member can let indirect traffic into the CIX, but other CIX members
can filter it if they so choose, without being required to offer it to
their direct (or indirect) customers.
It would seem that enforcement would be up to the individual CIX members,
not the CIX itself. If I become a CIX member, I may well desire to get
indirect traffic from certain other members, since my own goal is maximum
connectivity for myself and my customers.
Was Bill perhaps explaining the ANS filter? Or is there a different set
of CIX policy documents in the works?
Doug Luce
Telerama Public Access Internet
> According to what Bill Washburn at the CIX explained to me its by their
> choice.
>
> If what you say is true then only the big people need pay the $10k fee?
> Hey I have no problem with that!
>
> Don't mis-understand me but, if the CIX is a POR-ACTIVE TRADE ORG. then why
> not be more vocal about it? Otherwise people will draw conclusions based
> on no comment type responses.
>
> If you get CIX routing then you should have to pay for it. Not hide
> behind ANS or anyone else and ride FREE !
>
> Joseph Stroup
>
>
>
