[8464] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
ANS asa CIX Member: What Does it Mean?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gordon Cook)
Fri Nov 19 20:35:55 1993
From: cook@path.net (Gordon Cook)
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 17:33:35 PST
To: com-priv@psi.com
Cc: iprussia@sovam.com
ANS joins the CIX! Good news indeed. What does this do to level the commercial
market place? And does it mean that there is still an ANSnet AUP?
Let's say Toys R Us wants to join the internet and that universal connectivity
is VERY important for Toys R Us. It can connect as a PSI or Alternet or other
CIX customer and now be assured of getting to every mid-level via the ansnet
backbone? It sends commercial traffic wherever it wishes. Right?
Lets say it wants to join ANS - which now also is the CIX. If it connects at a
CNSS backbone site, it pays whatever rate it can negotiate with ANS and sends
commercial traffic wherever it wishes. If on the other hand it connects at an
ENSS site or via a mid-level it must pay the 2,000 or 4,000 dollar charge to the
infrastructure pool depending on whether the link is 56k or t-1? And once it
does this it sends commercial traffic wherever it wishes?
'
Or lets say it connects to a mid-level. If it does this it is free to use ANS
backbone routing as soon as it ponies up the 2 or 4 thousand dollar surcharge?
But if Toys R Us is connected to a mid-level that is connected to the cix, then
it can route through the CIX to traverse the ANSnet backbone if it needs to?
(WITHOUT paying the 2 or 4 k dollar surcharge?) And it sends commercial traffic
wherever it wishes?
Net effect: the internet is far less balkanized. The NSFnet AUP is de-facto
dead -- unless that is ANS can convince a customer to sign up in a situation
where it is liable to the infrastructure pool commercial surcharge, or unless a
commercial user of a regional is unable to get satisfactory routing through the
CIX and has to pay the surcharge to cross the ANS backbone?
I conclude that ANS is *unlikely to keep the surcharges* in effect because they
will now place it at a marketplace disadvantage and that the NSF AUP is at long
last dead - de facto if not de-jure.
What are the implications for Russian routing? If every CIX member must rout e
to every other, can NSFnet routing to Russia still be refused? I hope not.
Are my conclusions incorrect? If so would people please point out where and
why?
PS. Seems like some of the most serious aberrations of the last 3 years are on
their way to being fixed. With the kinks almost out of the current
architecture, isn't it a shame that the NSF is being allowed to impose the new
architecture on us all. Are we really powerless to STOP this imposition?
