Michael Dillon michael at
Fri Aug 21 23:43:51 UTC 1998

On Fri, 21 Aug 1998, Karl Denninger wrote:

> > > In fact, what you're advocating is billing the sender for *solicited data*
> > > from the recipient's point of view! 
> > 
> > Not at all. I am advocating paying for transit. 
> On the contrary.  
> If I buy a DS1 for transit from your network, I'm expecting the person I pay
> to provide transit - ALL OF THE TRANSIT.

Of course, and I agree with you 100%. But I was not talking about a
transit customer. I was talking about a peer whose traffic interchange is
asymmetric and who therefore uses some regional transit in the other guy's
network. I'm saying that instead of slamming the door in his face and
telling him to buy transit, we need to have a scalable peering option that
is a blend.

Maybe I am headed in the wrong direction with this but I do believe we
need a better solution for peering with asymmetric peers that reduces the
barriers to entry to $$$. Right now there are barriers to entry that
probably will not pass the scrutiny of the DOJ.

> No, its actually becoming MORE suitable.  Instead of burning the entire
> circuit in both directions, you're only burning half of it now (one
> direction).

You still have to pay for the whole circuit.

Michael Dillon                 -               Internet & ISP Consulting
Memra Communications Inc.      -               E-mail: michael at
Check the website for my Internet World articles -        

More information about the NANOG mailing list