BBN Peering issues
Todd 'Mr Vendor Relations' Nagengast
tsgd at alaska.net
Sun Aug 16 12:08:43 UTC 1998
On Sun, 16 Aug 1998, Michael Shields wrote:
> > fundamentally important that these ideals be extended to the future of
> > the Internet, if it is to have a future. No company should have the
> > right to force another to pay for connectivity simply because the latter
> > has not been around since the beginning or they are not a telco.
> BBN is answerable to their customers and shareholders and not to your
> or my ideals of how the Internet should work.
I agree with you from a business perspective. It's not our
right as "innocent bystanders" with no financial interest
in the company to have influence on corporate decisions.
But, I think that what BBN is doing isn't the right thing.
Instead of putting the work into solving the problem of how
to value the peering relationship in something other than
the quid pro quo metric of bytes, they're simply going
They don't have the right answer, nor do I. Figuring it out
has got to happen. Absent another, more appropriate, forum
having the discussion, here is best.
If none of us cared, would we be up at four o'clock in the
morning saying so?
> Shields, CrossLink.
Todd Nagengast /_\\//_\ Network Hero v. 907.562.4638
tsgd at alaska.net \ //\\ / Internet Alaska, Inc. f. 907.562.1677
My name is CCIEMontoya. You smurfed my router. Prepare to DIE!
1024/DB3041FD BE 60 73 FE 61 C5 A4 F3 C8 13 3C 93 C8 63 1F 5C
More information about the NANOG