Peering versus Transit

Sanjay Dani (maillists) indus at professionals.com
Tue Oct 1 02:23:54 UTC 1996


> From avg at quake.net Mon Sep 30 19:05 PDT 1996
> >I didn't know access service providers are not paid by their
> >web browsing clients.
> 
> The cost of transaction is split between content providers and
> clients.  Is this that hard to understand?

I guess you missed the sarcasm. Try applying your statement
to your own argument and see who is trying to fleece whom? This is
homework. No need to fill up my mailbox anymore.

> Heh.  That's an example of how stupid technology is being
> preserved by stupid legistlation.  The laws regarding POTS are
> generally legal fixes for techincal problems (like inability
> to block annoying calls).

Forgotten the syn flood attack so quickly? Heard of IP spoofing?

> FYI -- i had a more than an engineering role in service providers
> covering together all time zones on this planet.  One of them
> was the first ISP in 16-odd countries.  Another was the first
> commercial DS-3 backbone in the world.

That does not make your one sided arguments stand any more than
they did. Goes to prove experience does not necessarily equate
insight into all aspects of the business. You have a stake in
perpetuating the status quo. Me in changing it because it
doesn't make sense.

> So why you just don't learn why the present system is here,
> and why it delivers while others only promise.

No, it is beginning to suck. Have you checked reliability
of the backbones lately? Sigh.. old hats like you have a
hard time realizing that old models have to, and will,
change.

Sanjay.

PS. This is my last email on this topic.





More information about the NANOG mailing list