Generation of traffic in "settled" peering arrangement
owen at DeLong.SJ.CA.US
Mon Aug 24 19:12:51 UTC 1998
> At 11:00 AM 08/24/1998 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> >Except, John, that you ignore the fact that you have basically required
> >anyone who wants to put a high-bandwidth server on your network to accept
> >other people writing a blank check for them, regardless of the legitimacy
> >of the hits they receive.
> Clarify... right now, many organizations with high-speed connections
> to the Internet pay based on usage (including traffic sent). Doesn't
> anyone on a usage-sensitive leased-line connection pay based on the
> traffic regardless of the "legitimacy" of the hits received? Isn't
> this why we all hunt down SMURFers?
To some extent that's true. However, as a counter-point, consider such
sites as sunsite, wustl, smc.vnet.net, etc. I doubt those sites would
continue to exist in a solely bandwidth sensitive pay-as-you-go world.
I think they count on flat rate connectivity to be able to continue
to exist. I don't think the elimination of those sites (and many others
like them) would benefit the net. Do you?
More information about the NANOG