[477] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: CIX Implications
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (dave o'leary)
Fri Mar 29 06:25:13 1991
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 19:27:57 -0500
From: oleary@sura.net (dave o'leary)
To: com-priv@psi.com
ms> Message-Id: <9103270436.AA06987@psi.com>
ms> To: tmn!cook@uunet.uu.net
ms> Cc: com-priv@psi.com
ms> Subject: Re: CIX Implications
ms> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 26 Mar 91 23:13:11."
ms> <9103270414.AA29537@uunet.UU.NET>
ms> Date: Tue, 26 Mar 91 23:36:29 -0500
ms> From: "Martin Lee Schoffstall" <schoff@psi.com>
gc> <<MESSAGE from>> Gordon Cook 26-MAR-91 23:13
gc> cook@tmn
gc> The CIX announcement is interesting. Am surprised there has been little
gc> (no?) comment. Would someone say what a comapny like Harris which
gc> presumably is not now connected to any of the three partners in CIX would
gc> have to do to send its packets from say Suranet to a PSInet gateway where
gc> they could wind up presumably at plants in New York and california without
gc> using the NSFnet backbone.
ms> But doesn't SURANet have restrictions on THEIR backbone? For Harris to do
ms> what you suggest would require:
ms>
ms> 1) harris to join one of the 3 cix participants
ms> or
ms> 2) suarnet to join the CIX directly
While SURAnet primarily provides services to research and education sites,
we have no acceptable use policy that prohibits commercial traffic on
our network. SURAnet customers agree not to send traffic onto other networks
unless that traffic is consistent with the usage policies of that network.
Currently AlterNet and SURAnet exchange routing information at the SURAnet
NOC in College Park. I don't know if AlterNet is sending us all their
routes, or just for those networks that are "NSFnet approved". I don't know
if they intend to send us CERFnet and PSInet routes.
So presumably, if Harris (or any of SURAnet's other customers) want to
send or receive commercial traffic from any sites on AlterNet, they
can already do so. I don't know if AlterNet is willing to serve as a
transit network for SURAnet <-> PSInet traffic (for example).
gc> What i am getting at is whether or not some kind of traverse fee is
gc> feasible for those companies who are on other parts of the net as .coms or
gc> whether a full fledged CIX router on my company presence is necessary to
gc> enjoy the CIX freedom from commercial use restriction? Or is ther a
gc> middle course? Could I sign up as a monthly dial in customer.
ms> Who wants a traversal fee? Do you think SURANET's customer wants to
ms> hear about how they can do something for $Y and something more for $Y+X?
ms> I doubt it. Who wants to break the Internet paradigm right now of
ms> a flat fee, and universal access? I know of only one organization.
ms>
ms> Marty
I do not know of any plans to institute a "traverse fee" for customers
who want to send commercial traffic on SURAnet.
dave
