[8486] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Puzzled thoughts re ANS goals for CIX
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ed Tully)
Sat Nov 20 14:53:44 1993
From: tully@cscns.com (Ed Tully)
To: jcurran@nic.near.net (John Curran)
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 93 12:52:33 MST
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <9311201947.AA15386@cns.cscns.com>; from "John Curran" at Nov 20, 93 2:48 pm
John,
Thank you. I really appreciate your taking the time to reply. Now it makes
sense!
>
> --------
> ] From: "Dick St.Peters" <stpeters@spare-parts.crd.ge.com>
> ] Subject: Re: Puzzled thoughts re ANS goals for CIX
> ] Date: Sat, 20 Nov 93 14:16:38 EST
> ] ...
> ] > From: tully@cscns.com (Ed Tully)
> ] >
> ] > ! Would one of you be kind enuf to summarize the "discussion" since
> ] > Ittai announcement about ANS joining the CIX? and, Ittai, since ANS
> ] > joined, wouldn't that mean that ANS CO+RE is also a member, since ANS owns
> ] > CO+RE?
> ]
> ] Ed, there's nobody around capable of giving a neutral description. The
> ] only people paying close enough attention to understand are those who
> ] have stakes in the outcomes. There are several threads intertwined,
> ] and the number of combinations of views is enormous.
>
> Dick,
>
> I actually feel that there are several organizations that are aware of
> what is going on, and are capable of providing a neutral description.
>
> Ed,
>
> ANS CO+RE has histortically seen itself as a Internet _transport_ service.
>
> CIX has historically seen itself as an Internet _exchange_ service.
>
> The only folks who connect to ANS CO+RE aare those which need Internet
> transit to some other location.
>
> The folks who connect to the CIX simply want to peer with the fellow
> CIX members at the same location.
>
> If ANS CO+RE were to interconnect with the CIX, the CIX would expect
> ANS to pay CIX membership (10$K/yr), just like any other provider.
>
> If the CIX were to interconnect with ANS, ANS would expect the CIX to
> pay for ANS commercial transit, just as many other network providers
> do.
>
> To ANS CO+RE, the thought of not collecting from the CIX (and indeed,
> paying to provide the CIX transit service) seems unreasonable.
>
> To the CIX, paying ANS for transit is not an option, as they do not
> pay the other CIX participants for that.
>
> Net result: Standoff between the CIX and ANS CO+RE for the last 14
> months. They interconnected at the request of NEARnet,
> so that NEARnet traffic could reach _any_ commercial site.
> (We pay ANS CO+RE for transit, and are a CIX member.)
>
> Over time, the value of connecting to the CIX has increased with its
> membership. Several weeks back, the CIX implemented filtering so that
> its interchange services was only used by members. ANS CO+RE had been
> able to use the interchange due to the particular routing contraints,
> and suddenly found itself unable to reach CIX member networks. Likewise,
> CIX members which did not have NSFNET connectivity found that they were
> unable to reach certain ANS sites as a result. This was particularly
> problematic for some European networks.
>
> ANS CO+RE has decided that its previous position (of not joining the CIX)
> was not longer worth pursuing, for reasons as yet not stated. The net
> result of ANS CO+RE joining will be a single commercial Internet, rather
> than the two distinct clouds that we had previously.
>
> /John
>
--
Edward J. Tully
Network Training & Consulting
Community News Service
Colorado Springs, CO
