|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: ratios
Peter Jansen wrote: >Scott: >Have a look at our peering policy at www.cw.com/peering. It will >provide you with some information on peering with large networks. This should read: "Have a look at our peering policy at www.cw.com/peering if you want to see a prime example of how *not* to develop your peering policy." Peter, I can't believe you have the testicular fortutude to come on this list with this garbage. Do you think we have forgotten the PSI/C&W peering fiasco? Dude, you had *paying* customers who depended on having routes into AS174, and you turned your back on them, knowing damn good and well that PSI was in no position to purchase transit. In fact, I'm surprised to see that you're still a C&W employee after all that mess. Plus, wtf is this clause about announcing 5000 routes? What a crock of s**t! This really encourages aggregation, doesn't it? You'd think, after all of the Exodus customers jumping ship after C&W bought them, that you'd start rethinking your business practices. People want, and are willing to pay for, a well connected network, and AS3561 isn't, at least not to the outside world. Also, I would like to point out that if you're mostly content, I doubt you'll ever be able to meet C&W's peering criteria because they have practically no eyeballs. Their wholesale dial division is pretty much extinct, and they seem to be leaning more toward hosting than selling T1s to mom and pop dialup ISPS. It's a great big catch-22 any way you look at it, and I hate you, Peter Jansen, for it. There's a special level of hell for people like you when you die. Dean >Regards > >Peter Jansen >Global Peering >Cable & Wireless > > > > > >Date: Tue, 07 May 2002 13:30 -0400 (EDT) >From: Scott Granados <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sender: [email protected] >Delivered-to: [email protected] >Delivered-to: [email protected] >Delivered-to: [email protected] >Subject: ratios > > >I'm not overly familiar with this but I wondered if someone could detail >for me the basics of using ratios to determine elegibility to peer? I >have heard that some carrers especially the largest require a specific >ratio is this in fact true and is the logic as simple as just insuring >equal use of the peer? > >Thanks > >Scott _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com
|