Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy]y

30 Oct 1996

      If you filtered me by MAC address I could swap cards and get in.

  Unless you did inclusive filtering, and then if you wanted to peer
  with me, and I had to swap a card, you couldn't.

  The gigaswitches do port filtering, I believe that was agreed to 
  be the better choice.

  I certainly hope it's a choice, at least, right Steve.... :)

  -alan

Dima Volodin said:
] 
] You don't mean changing one MAC address in Gigaswitch configuration is a
] bolder feat than swapping (failed) equipment, do you?
] 
] 
] Dima
] 
] Deepak Jain writes:
] > 
] > Problem is that if hardware fails or is swapped out, MAC addresses change.
] > 
] > -Deepak.
] > 
] > On Wed, 30 Oct 1996, Dima Volodin wrote:
] > 
] > > Isn't it possible to filter MAC addresses at Gigaswitches?
] > > 
] > > 
] > > Dima
] > > 
] > > Paul Ferguson writes:
] > > > 
] > > > Apparently people are still missing the point. On a shared media
] > > > exchange, there is nothing to preclude another entity from pointing
] > > > default to you even if they are *not* peering with you [a.k.a. bit-dumping].
] > > > 
] > > > - paul
] > > > 
] > > > 
] > > > At 11:15 AM 10/30/96 -0500, Pritish Shah wrote:
] > > > 
] > > > >
] > > > >So far from what I have gathered, everyone is afraid of being used as a
] > > > >transit point. There is a very simple solution available which I can't
] > > > >figure out why people are not using. 
] > > > >
] > > > >Both peers charge each other for the bits being peered. So now if one
] > > > >peer is being used as a transit point, then they get compensated for it. 
] > > > >
] > > > >Eg
] > > > >
] > > > >AAA               BBB
] > > > >15443621 bits ->  15443621 bits
] > > > >20000000 bits <-  20000000 bits
] > > > >
] > > > >
] > > > >Difference 4556379 bits additional sent from BBB to AAA
] > > > >
] > > > >Applying lets say 1 cent per  100 bit charge, AAA gets $455.64 from BBB
] > > > >
] > > > >Simple!!!!
] > > > >
] > > > >Now with this kind of peering arrangement, no one has to be worried about
] > > > >being used as a transit point -- infact they will want to be used as a
] > > > >transit point. 
] > > > >
] > > > >This will also allow medium sized ISPs to peer with each-other. 
] > > > >
] > > > >So here is my question -- why is this kind of arrangement not being used
] > > > >anywhere???
] > > > >
] > > > >Pritish
] > > > >
] > > > 
] > > > 
] > > 
] > > 
] > 
] 
]

Re: Bit-dumping [Was: Re: Peering Policy]y

Alan Hannan