cogent and henet not peering
volkirik at gmail.com
Sun Aug 21 00:48:38 UTC 2022
its upto mike leber and dave schaeffer to decide. they can either
accept or reject the solution
I have been always believing content creator/provider should pay
expenses (at least excess traffic).
because they put their server in some datacenter and reach all of the
internet.. their backbone expenses are less..
i can understand that todays datacenters including he.net are interested
to participate in 200-300 IXPs.
well that acceptable. it should be considered too
so i would offer both companies 3 cent per mbps for excess traffic.
21.08.2022 03:25 tarihinde Forrest Christian (List Account) yazdı:
> But that traffic was likely requested by and for the benefit of the
> person the traffic is being sent to.
> I've always found the argument that the quantity of traffic is the
> indicator of who should pay to be questionable.
> If I'm an end user on an eyeball user and request a big download or
> streaming from a provider, isn't it me that caused that traffic to
> flow? One could argue that I am the one that needs to pay.
> On the other hand, one could argue that it's the provider of the
> content that I requested that needs to pay, since it's their content
> which is being distributed.
> When you get to peering between two providers it's almost impossible
> to decide who needs to pay. As I mentioned above, passing that
> traffic is actually to the benefit of both providers.
> About the only settlement I could see is where one of the providers is
> bearing most of the transport costs. For example a regional provider
> only peering at one exchange point might expect some settlement costs
> with a big international provider that is effectively carrying their
> traffic both directions around the globe. But the quantity of that
> type of traffic is likely minimal in the grand scheme of things.
> Even then one might argue that connectivity to the small provider is
> still valuable to the customers of the large provider.
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022, 9:32 AM VOLKAN KIRIK <volkirik at gmail.com> wrote:
> the more uploading side pays each month for the excess amount.
> as content networks are supposed to pay expenses.
> what do you think?
> 19.08.2022 18:28 tarihinde Mike Hammett yazdı:
>> The problem them becomes *who* pays? When do the tables turn as
>> to who pays?
>> The alpha gets paid and the beta does the paying?
>> The network with more POPs gets paid?
>> The network with more downstream ASes gets paid?
>> Is it the same for IPv4 as it is for IPv6?
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
>> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
>> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
>> *From: *"VOLKAN KIRIK" <volkirik at gmail.com>
>> <mailto:volkirik at gmail.com>
>> *To: *"Rubens Kuhl" <rubensk at gmail.com> <mailto:rubensk at gmail.com>
>> *Cc: *nanog at nanog.org, dschaeffer at cogentco.com, peering at cogentco.com
>> *Sent: *Friday, August 19, 2022 10:22:00 AM
>> *Subject: *Re: cogent and henet not peering
>> this is 50/50 situation. nobody has to peer for free.
>> but everyone can.
>> lets just say above 1:1 ratio he.net <http://he.net> pays their
>> own ip transit price to cogent for paid peering excess amount and
>> both sides monitor traffic
>> we can solve this issue by becoming middlemen worldwide...
>> both operators are cheap and they could all compete in quality.
>> level3 pays comcast reasonable (cheap) price (under NDA maybe?).
>> why wouldnt mleber?
>> but to make it fair, as he.net <http://he.net> becomes ww tier-1
>> operator day-by-day, lets just limit pricing to excess amount of
>> thanks for reading
>> would appreciate your support
>> 19.08.2022 18:09 tarihinde Rubens Kuhl yazdı:
>> OTOH, knowing that Cogent loves splitting the global Internet is one
>> good reason to not contract their services.
>> I think they sell traffic to their private Intranet. Which is huge,
>> but doesn't encompass the whole Internet.
>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:04 PM VOLKAN KIRIK<volkirik at gmail.com> <mailto:volkirik at gmail.com> wrote:
>> lets just say cogent gives 400GE in each pop they have in common withhe.net <http://he.net> for free.
>> BUT they will rate-limithe.net <http://he.net> links to previous month's 95th percentile upload or download (which is minimum) rate (each month)
>> to make ratio 1:1... to make downstream and upstream traffics fair...
>> come on people,
>> segmentation is bad.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NANOG