Sprint peering policy
Pat Myrto
pat at rwing.ORG
Sat Jun 29 04:03:23 UTC 2002
Paul Vixie has declared that:
>
>
> > Usually the pain for one party is greater than the pain for the
> > other, unless they are really peers of each other, in which case
> > settlement free interconnections happen. However, if there isn't
> > equal amounts of pain being felt on both sides, then normally the
> > party with the more hurt tries to redress the issue.
> >
> > Usually this imbalance in perceived value is redressed by one of the
> > parties offering to make up the difference by some form of a transfer
> > of money.
>
> and yet, the party who experiences the pain will normally perceive the
> other party's *intentions* as the cause of that pain. knowing that the
> pain can be transformed from "can't exchange traffic" pain into "must
> pay money" pain tends to reinforce this perception.
>
> when this situation has existed in other industries, gov't intervention
> has always resulted. even when the scope is international. i've not
> been able to puzzle out the reason why the world's gov'ts have not
> stepped in with some basic interconnection requirements for IP carriers.
Better not say that too loud, some politico will get a
hot idea. While intervention MIGHT reduce 'pain' the
resultant new pain from govt rules/regs/decrees/bureaucracy
may well induce a lot more pain for everyone in the
long run.
All too often govt 'fixes' end up being worse than the problem(s)
they claim to address...
Jush a random thot...
Pat M/HW
--
#include <std.disclaimer.h> Pat Myrto (pat at rwing dot ORG) Seattle WA
Americans used to roar like lions for liberty: Now they bleat like sheep
for security
-Norman Vincent Peale
More information about the NANOG
mailing list