North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Peering vs SFI (was Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering)

  • From: vijay gill
  • Date: Wed Oct 05 17:15:55 2005

Richard Irving wrote:

 Maybe not, the depeering L3 is involved in is sort of like blackmail,
we can all thank the indicted ex-CEO of WorldCom, Bernie Ebbers,
for the modern peering "There can only be one" rule set.
Because you were there at the time Ebbers was going around? Do you have any idea of how this works? I am going to go ahead and say no.

  Big guys double dip, and little guys are paying half the big
guys double dip... great deal if you can con someone into
accepting it, or are big enough to -force- them into accepting it.

Time to quote Geoff Huston one more time.

"A true peer relationship is based on the supposition that either party can terminate the interconnection relationship and that the other party does not consider such an action a competitively hostile act. If one party has a high reliance on the interconnection arrangement and the other does not, then the most stable business outcome is that this reliance is expressed in terms of a service contract with the other party, and a provider/client relationship is established"

There is no big guy double dipping conspiracy theory here, it's really very simply laid out and explained in the above paragraph. Really a work of art that should be printed out and nailed to the forehead of the Peering Coordinators everywhere.

So, part of this entire debacle is terminology. We need to kill the use of the heavily overloaded word Peer and replace it with what it tries to mean - Settlement Free Interconnect or SFI.

Most of the so-called Peering Coordinators need to realize that what they really are doing is better described by SFI Secretary instead.

Case in point.

L3 wants CoGent to kneel, and kiss the ring,
nothing more, nothing less.

 "They must smell blood in the water".

Lets apply Geoffs Razor to the above. I think L3 thinks that the value they get from connecting with Cogent is not justifying their cost, so they are pulling the plug. "Smelling blood in the water" indeed. Welcome to the inet-access of the new millennium.

Some providers, a legacy of course, are "transit free", and rely on direct routes.. Soon,
there won't be many of these left... and it will be a non-issue.

"There can only be *one* !" - WorldCom chant, Circa 1995.
WorldCom didn't know what IP SFI was in 95. Perhaps you mean UUNET/MFS?

     Like I said, light a fire, and lets burn Bernie at the stake!

 "I saw him fly up into the sky with the Devil himself !" *


Best to stay in lurk mode for a while longer.