North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: New peering criteria
- From: Jeff Mcadams
- Date: Wed Jun 06 13:27:39 2001
Also sprach Sean Donelan
>Is there any limit what a provider can write in a peering criteria?
>This seems to be very much a telco mentality. We wrote the tariff, but
>we have no choice but to kill you because its in the tariff. Yes, we
>could change the tariff in less than 24-hours, but that's not in the
>tariff. So you must die. Sorry, there is nothing we can do.
No doubt...that is *so* true.
To extend the comparison of ISP peering to the telco world...I found
this ruling from the KY PSC entertaining and enlightning. Of particular
interest to compare with the current C&W - PSI issue are issues 7 and 9
from this ruling, and to a lesser degree issue 18. Check it out.
>Peering criteria seem to be nothing more than a fictional fig leaf.
>Peering is a straight business relationship. Which provider is hurt
>more by the termination of peering.
>If you think it will hurt the other provider more than you, you'll
>terminate the agreement. If you think it will hurt you more, you'll
>fight to keep it in place.
Actually...I would say its more complicated than that. Any action taken
by a corporation would be a positive thing. If the perception of
severing peering is that it would hurt your company then the company
won't do it. Now, it does get complicated in that you might see a
company use a thought process along the lines of "Peering will hurt us,
but it will hurt our competitor more, and hurting our competitor
benefits us, and the benefit from hurting our competitor is greater than
the hurt from severing the peering, so ultimately its a benefit to us to
sever the peer"
Of course, this all assumes that companies think through these things
logically, which I think is folly (especially for telco/ISPs)
Jeff McAdams Email: email@example.com
Head Network Administrator Voice: (502) 966-3848
IgLou Internet Services (800) 436-4456