North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now
Richard A Steenbergen wrote: Time out here. John set the stage: cold potato addressed the long haul (or at least that's the assumption in place when I hopped on board). If NetA and NetB are honoring MED (or other appropriate knob), NetA->NetB traffic has already arrived at the closest mutual peering point in the A->B direction. The rest of the infrastructure would be the responsibility of NetB to get the traffic to CustomerPortXYZ, no? How could CustomerXY get any closer to NetA without cutting NetB out of the middle, and if NetB is out of the middle, why should CustomerXY pay NetB anything?I can almost smell your sarcasm from here. :)Pete Templin wrote:John Curran wrote:And there's still revenue, as the traffic is going to customers (we all filter our prefixes carefully, right?). What's the problem with cold-potato again, or should we all just try to double-dip?Cold-potato only addresses the long-haul; there's still cost on the receiving network even if its handed off at the closest interconnect to the final destination(s). pt
|