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: cogent+ Level(3) are ok now

  • From: John Curran
  • Date: Tue Nov 01 10:06:06 2005

At 9:40 AM -0500 11/1/05, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
>
>I think everyone agrees that unbalanced ratios can create a situation where one side pays more than the other.  However, assuming something can be used to keep the costs equal (e.g. cold-potato?),

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).

> I do not see how one network can tell another: "You can't send me what my customers are requesting of you."

Depeering seems to say exactly that, no?

>If your business model is to provide flat-rate access, it is not _my_ responsibility to ensure your customers do not use more access than your flat-rate can compensate you to deliver.

Agreed...  I'm not defending the business model, only pointing out that some folks may find it easier to bill their "peers" than customers.

/John




Discussion Communities


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


Merit Network, Inc.