- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Transaction Based Settlements Encourage Waste (was Re: BBN/GTEI)
by Hank Nussbacher 26 Aug '98

26 Aug '98

At 03:48 PM 8/25/98 -0700, Sean M. Doran wrote: >> What about netflow ? > >[to Vadim Antonov who said that _metering_ traffic is intractable] > >Dear ISP - you have made an accounting error that I am able to demonstrate >in my copious traffic logs. Please credit $x to my account. > >or > >Dear Customer - our copious traffic logs indicate that you generated x traffic >last month. Please pay $x net 30 days. Thank you. > >Dispute resolution -- it's fun! You don't say. Back in 2/95 I hit the following: CSCdi27509: Frame relay counters not updated when fast switching (it was fixed for 10.0. 10.2 and 10.3 fixes were being tested at the time). The MIB stats (inOctets, outOctets) were all wrong for FR subinterface customers. Cisco listed it as a sev=3 bug even though I argued that if ISPs are billing based on this info they may open themselves to a class action suit. Everyone inherently trusts the numbers coming out of your Cisco box. As we have seen bugs in all aspects of IOS code, some dormant for 10 years (see the recent remote crash telnet bug), one would have to independently verify that the numbers Cisco MIBs, netflow of whatever produce are correct, and this procedure would have to be done every time you upgrade to a new IOS version. Ever try doing that? And every time you add a new function you would have to go back and recheck (ever turn on FR traffic shaping and see what happens? :-)) Can of worms. -Hank > > Sean. > >

1 0

Information/Help requested in locating quality Japanese ISP
by Rizzo, Mark 26 Aug '98

26 Aug '98

If there is someone out there who has a good insight of the Japanese Internet market or has done Internet business in Japan could you please drop me an e-mail. Our company is looking to co-locate some high bandwidth server equipment and we need to find the ISP/partner in Japan that has the best Japanese/PAC Rim connectivity. Thanks in advance, Mark Rizzo Manager of Online Operations Origin Systems, INC

1 0

Metered IP billing is indeed possible
by Bruce Hahne 26 Aug '98

26 Aug '98

So, umm, who here recently claimed that packet metering and billing in an ISP/IP setting is technically impossible? In my mailbox this evening I see: > Cisco, Solect Offer Usage-Based Billing Solution > > Cisco Systems, Inc., a global leader in Internet > networking, and Solect Technology Group, a leading provider > of infrastructure software solutions for service providers, > have announced current availability of IAF/NetFlow, an > advanced usage-based billing system integrating Cisco's > NetFlow software into Solect's Internet Administration > Framework (IAF) product used by high-speed, broadband > network and service providers for commercial and business > users. Solect sells telco billing systems. There are other products about to hit the market which do IP metering, and they're going to use telco billing systems as a back end as well. The metered billing steamroller is coming, people. Settlements won't be too far behind. Watch out, because the telcos have over 100 years of experience playing this game. (What was that NANOG 13 T-shirt slogan again, hm?) Bruce Hahne hahne(a)netcom.com

3 2

Buy my box to guarantee your traffic patterns!
by Jon Green 26 Aug '98

26 Aug '98

Hi. I am announcing here the formation of a new company and a new product called "PacketWarrior" which network providers can use to enforce their pre-determined traffic profiles. Not sending enough traffic to one of your peers? PacketWarrior will match their traffic bit for bit to ensure an equal balance. Sending too much traffic to your peers? Configure PacketWarrior with the addresses of web servers on your peer's networks, and it will automatically download web pages over and over until it achieves a balance! Order now for four easy payments of only $1999 each! Billed to your Visa or Mastercard, and shipped discreetly in plain brown paper wrapping. -Jon ----------------------------------------------------------------- * Jon Green * "Life's a dance * * jcgreen(a)netINS.net * you learn as you go" * * Finger for Geek Code/PGP * * * #include "std_disclaimer.h" * http://www.quadrunner.com/~jon * -------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: BBN/GTEI (fwd)
by MegaZone 26 Aug '98

26 Aug '98

Once upon a time Austin Schutz shaped the electrons to say... > BBN should either find a way of making dialup profitable or get in to >other lines of service. Trying to extort money from peers is a ludicrous >waste of time. Um - BBN/GTEI doesn't DO dialup. The only dial we have is the DiaLinx wholesale dial reselling. There is GTE.net, but that's a completely seperate animal. GTEI/BBN does 56K-T3 lines, managed firewalls, web hosting, dial outsourcing, managed VPN, etc. -MZ -- <URL:mailto:megazone@megazone.org> Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me.. Join ISP/C Internet Service Providers' Consortium <URL:http://www.ispc.org/> "A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 781-788-0130 <URL:http://www.gweep.net/> <URL:http://www.megazone.org/> Hail Discordia!

1 0

Re: BBN/GTEI (fwd)
by MegaZone 26 Aug '98

26 Aug '98

Once upon a time Mark Tripod shaped the electrons to say... >Maybe Exodus should buy GTE :) No, that's Bell Atlantic. ;-) -MZ -- <URL:mailto:megazone@megazone.org> Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me.. Join ISP/C Internet Service Providers' Consortium <URL:http://www.ispc.org/> "A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 781-788-0130 <URL:http://www.gweep.net/> <URL:http://www.megazone.org/> Hail Discordia!

1 0

Re: Transaction Based Settlements Encourage Waste (was Re: B
by Sean M. Doran 26 Aug '98

26 Aug '98

Mike Leber asked: | Don't you mean senders here? (You seemed to be proposing a senders pay | system.) If not, of course receivers would continue to participate, they | earn money under your scenario for each bit they receive! A transmitter always has the option not to send. If they are unwilling to pay the receiver, they just don't send to it. Note that transmitters and receivers here are not end-to-end, but rather hop-by-hop, organizationally speaking. That is, sender host/site pays its provider, which pays the next provider which pays the next provider which pays the destination. What is paid is a business negotiation, clearly, and one option is that the payment amount is zero (i.e., I will only send you traffic if I don't have to pay for it). Basically that last sentence is precisely the issue between BBN and Exodus (cf. I will only accept traffic from you if you pay for it). Sean.

2 1

Re: Transaction Based Settlements Encourage Waste (was Re: BBN/GTEI)
by Sean M. Doran 25 Aug '98

25 Aug '98

> What about netflow ? [to Vadim Antonov who said that _metering_ traffic is intractable] Dear ISP - you have made an accounting error that I am able to demonstrate in my copious traffic logs. Please credit $x to my account. or Dear Customer - our copious traffic logs indicate that you generated x traffic last month. Please pay $x net 30 days. Thank you. Dispute resolution -- it's fun! Sean.

2 1

Re: Transaction Based Settlements Encourage Waste (was Re: BBN/GTEI)
by Chris A. Icide 25 Aug '98

25 Aug '98

Applying the current model of the telco transaction based settlement to the current end-user pricing model of the Internet is broken. There is a major disconnect between the two. When a standard telephone call is made one or the other end-user supplies revenue to the company/organization which supplies thier local service. Whereas in the Internet today, both sides pay for the privelege of having a full time open (or long-term part time open) connection to the network. These Internet end-users do not look anything like telephone end-users. Any attempt to apply the current telco model to the Internet model without significant rewriting of one or both will most likely be a taxation upon anyones sanity. There is another disconnect within the Internet that should (if it isn't already) be driving stong change that would most likely invalidate any hack that is developed on the current model. Whereas the cost of delivering packets outside of a small geographical area (call it the "Zero-mile" area) is based upon milage and bandwidth used. Currently in the US most bandwidth is sold at a flat price per Mbit. Whether or not it's billed upon usage or billed upon some predetermined level that the user cannot exceed. This constitues another disconnect between base cost of goods and revenues of sales. As the industry grows more mature, these need to be tied together, otherwise in the end, the end-user will be gouged in one manner or another, and the disconnect of COGS versus Revenues tends to lead toward artificial operating costs. -Chris

4 4

Re: Generation of traffic in "settled" peering arrangement
by owen＠DeLong.SJ.CA.US 25 Aug '98

25 Aug '98

> Owen DeLong wrote: > > > > Actually, if the content provider simply honors MEDs, that should cover most > > of the issue. Then, the long haul is done across the content providers' > > backbone anyway. > > Then you get into address aggregation issues that have already been > discussed before. > > The way I see it, an intelligent content distribution scheme addresses the > vast majority of these concerns. > > So, a question to the large web farms. Why is it that the largest web sites > still seem to be hosted out of a single data center? > Where do you get your data? It seems to me that the bulk of the largest web sites with which I am familiar are located in at least two datacenters. > Alec > Owen Senior Network Engineer Exodus > -- > +-------------------------------------+----------------------------------+ > |Alec H. Peterson - ahp(a)hilander.com | Lead Network Architect | > |http://www.hilander.com | Erols Internet - an RCN Company | > +-------------------------------------+----------------------------------+ >

5 6