[2838] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: CIX membership requirement for use of CIX
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (the terminal of Geoff Goodfellow)
Wed Jun 10 12:53:39 1992
To: Mitchell Kapor <mkapor@eff.org>
Cc: BRIAN KAHIN <KAHIN@hulaw1.harvard.edu>, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 10 Jun 92 10:21:22 -0400.
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 09:52:04 MST
From: the terminal of Geoff Goodfellow <geoff@fernwood.mpk.ca.us>
>Entities which are themselves networks, are distinct organizational
>entities, and offer commercial IP services in multiple geographical
>locations (typically across LATA boundaries) must join the CIX to get the
>connectivity. Other entities need not join themselves as long as they are
>attached to a network which is a CIX member. Since networks are in the
>business of selling connections to individual customers, CIX participation
>which expands connectivity can be positioned as a major customer benefit.
>Therefore passing on the cost of the CIX membership can be successfully
>rationalized.
Perhaps a different qualifying phrasing might be?
Entities which TRANSPORT THIRD PARTY TCP/IP TRAFFIC AND
RESELL TCP/IP NETWORKING CONNECTIVITY TO OTHER ENTITIES IN SINGLE OR
MULTIPLE GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS MUST JOIN THE CIX TO GET THEIR THIRD
PARTY ENTITIES CONNECTIVITY TO OTHER CIX MEMBER NETWORKS.
I think the real distinctive issue is THIRD PARTY IP traffic and not the
LATA boundary or any geographical boundary. An RBOC, for example, is
prohibited by the MJF from offering networking services IP, X.25 or
otherwise 'cross LATA boundaries (without the involvement of an
interexchange carrier -- but that's another story!). A start-up IP service
provider may want to begin an IP service business in single geographic
area, such as the bay area or another metropolitan area and would like to
join the CIX for customers which connect to its hub.
Perhaps our colleagues at AlterNet, CerfNET and PSI have something to
contribute here, since I believe subscribers of their networking services
are prohibited from offering third party IP services without a special
dispensation?
Geoff
