Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

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

Re: Email peering (Was: Economics of SPAM [Was: Micorsoft's SenderIDAuthentication......?]

  • From: Michael.Dillon
  • Date: Thu Jun 16 11:50:16 2005

> >If the BGP peering side of the business can sort out all of 
> >this stuff, then why can't the email side of the business do 
> >the same, or perhaps, do even better?
> 
> It's not comparable, as has been explained several times to you.

Perhaps you have never been involved in BGP peering? Let
me explain what the BGP peering side of the business does,
in addition to operating BGP sessions with peers. To start
with, most ISPs don't start peering until after they have
negotiated and agreement. Those agreements are legal contracts
with many pages specifying the responsibilities of the two
parties, limits on how the technology is to be applied,
SLAs, processes for interoperation and communication between
NOCs, i.e. the people protocols.

The thousands of bilateral BGP peering contracts are most
definitely comparable to the email peering that I am 
proposing. I have seen many of these contracts in companies
that I worked for in the past. They are rather similar to
one another in many ways. Since the total number of BGP
peers is rather small, it is quite workable to let these
contracts evolve to some sort of rough standard and that is
what has happened.

In the email world, there are many, many more players, and
some kind of secret sauce is essential to converge bilateral
email peering agreements to some kind of community standard
rather than letting evolution take its course and risking
chaos as a result. The stuff that you call RIR sauce, is what
I would call "open and public negotiation" in some kind of
a forum which is not biased or dominated by parties who may
have some market dominance. It is, in fact, the antithesis of
a model with a few big actors.

It is also a model that works, more or less, in other industries.
The FCC is one example imposed by government. The RIRs is 
another example formed from the ground up. There is more than
one way to do this. Which would you prefer as a role model,
the FCC or ARIN?

--Michael Dillon
P.S. ARIN itself has absolutely nothing to do with email
services and is unlikely to get involved in this in any
way. I am using them mainly as a successful example of
an open public organization that manages a common resource.





Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.