Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: peering charges?
From: "Dave O'Shea" <doshea () mail wiltel net>
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 02:21:14 -0600

From: Vadim Antonov <avg () pluris com>

Since some of the larger vendors (Cisco mostly) has introduced
accounting
features into their software settlements could start any time.

a) the accounting was there for years, so what

.. But the huge glut of "I wanna be an ISP too!" guys operating a Cisco
2500 out of their garage was not. A large number of ISP's simply don't know
what they're doing; witness the universal broadcasting of RFC1597
addresses. 


b) a 100-byte packet travelled from provider A to provider B.  Should A
pay
   to B or vice versa?

It's the golden rule - "He who has the gold, makes the rules". Not that the
idea isn't without problems.. But seeing peering procedures formalized
would make life easier, even if it cost a few bucks. Being a fairly small
start up, I know that the odds of UUnet cutting me a check every month are
between slim and none.

You can tell this list is populated only by Real Engineers. Ten messages
and counting on Saturday night. :-) 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]