Geoff Huston <G.Huston@aarnet.edu.au> writes
If you manage to provide a better model for interconnection which includes a rational economic model of interaction then, strangely enough, you then have a powerful tool you can use to address teh technical issue of scaling the routing domain.
i.e.
"free transit" is stupid, as Andrew indicates.
"transit" is possible given a rational economic model of the transit interaction.
In the same way that giving away IP addresses and giving away IP routing can only be described as a very bad case of irrational behaviour, especially when the underlying resource is under stress as it is at present, then I'd also note that giving away transit is similarly a case completely irrational behaviour!
Agreed, but doesn't this lead to the religious War On Settlements. Yakov's push/pull paper on route announcements coupled with traffic levies would seem to to address your point. Do you agree?
All this points to a desperate need for a more realistic economic structure to be used within a number of key aspects of Internet infrastructure.
Agreed, what are the forums, though? There are both techie questions to be answered as well as hard business case scenarios. NANOG seem unlikely to address the former, where the IETF seems ill equipped to answer the latter. -scott [...]
Andrew's comments:
Half correct. Everyone in the area carries full routes for the block. Everyone outside the area can listen to only the /8 advertisement.
So these providers are providing the free transit to their non-customers?
This does not make any business sense; it will not happen. --asp@uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan)