|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical welcome to the one size fits all Internet discussion swamp
I think we're being more than a little silly here. Person A says that the financial model for internet peering should be client funded, and B says no is should be content provider. folks, you can both be right for various situations. Most newspapers and magazines are largely paid for by the advertiser. Most subsciption services are paid for mostly by the clients. In each case the line is not simple, and the delivery media adapts to the money flow and vice versa. The problem comes from one of two major insanity swamps. a) deciding that there is one model that should be used for pricing. b) trying to decide how to classify a given flow, and the contractual concepts involved. Maybe I'm just hardened to it all, but anything I can't describe in a contract with terms, costs and redress is too soft for me to chage money. That's why we have these simple minded peering agreements. Anything beyond the mindless trading starts you onto a slippery slope from which I see no return. Phone settlements are 100x simpler than this stuff, and you see as the cost of haul drops this will become a major part of total cost of a phone call. I can understand bandwidth times distance hauled in simple terms, so saying I may not accept nearest exit routing from someone else is within my scope of simple minded. my last mail on this whole subject, jerry |