|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Sprint peering policy (fwd)
At 02:15 PM 7/1/2002 -0400, Ukyo Kuonji wrote: The RBOCs thought the same when they pushed for recip-comp. The CLECsYou wouldn't buy the notion of reciprical billing? I think this would most likely be the fairest, but maybe the hardest to implement. It would either have to be done at the end points, or at every interconnect. In this method, if the traffic across an interconnect would truely be a 1 to 1 ratio, then the bills would cancel each other out, where the 1 to 1.6 or so would lean in towards favoring the company taking more traffic onto it's network.From: Paul A Flores <[email protected]> Since this is basically a financial issue (and not really a regulatory issue), the only way you could make it 'fair' is to have some kind of mandate from a government body to MAKE peering 'fair'. The only way _I_ would buy off on that, would be to have some kind of subsidy paid from tax dollars to the carriers in question to 'force' them to peer with people who have no other redeeming value. in general then targeted ISP traffic and recip-comp became a drain to the RBOC coffers instead of the boon. Look at the current recip-comp scenario as an exchange of bits/sec instead of minutes. Do you really think the model will fare any better in the IP world? In a peering relationship, each derives benefit. Trying to pin a monetary value on that benefit will never reach a wide enough agreement to handle a recip-comp model. I think the current 'bill and keep' model ( which the telco interconnect agreements seem to be trending toward ) works best for Internet traffic. To put this another way, imagine two networks. One is a large content provider, they target webhosting customers. One is a large access provider, they target end-users. I think that being able to reach a large number of end-users is a benefit to the first network. I also think that being able to reach a large amount of content is a benefit to the second network. If they peer, their traffic ratio will be 1:1 yet both networks gain significant ( imho ) benefit. Bill and keep seems the only sensible way to me. -Chris -- \\\|||/// \ StarNet Inc. \ Chris Parker \ ~ ~ / \ WX *is* Wireless! \ Director, Engineering | @ @ | \ http://www.starnetwx.net \ (847) 963-0116 oOo---(_)---oOo--\------------------------------------------------------ \ Wholesale Internet Services - http://www.megapop.net
|