<snipped>
How many of you pass packets without getting paid?
in the case of intervening entities, it is true that they have no link to the sender or receiver. my packets from office to home can traverse at 3 or more networks that are not paid by me, or my company.
If I pay you to send my packets and you pay bob to send my packets then I have paid bob to send my packets. Transitive property of payment. ;-)
Yes, the transitive property prevails but there are constraints: imagine if Bob were not there to take this "relatively small" payment! Thus if I pay you to send my packets and you pay Bob to send those packets -- then indirectly I have paid Bob an amount which is much less compared to what you would charge me if you had to "build the Bob" yourself -- I am sure you would pass on the costs to me, the end user, especially if there is no such thing as unpaid volunteerism :) The paradox is that the existence of Bob lowers the cost to an end user -- there is some such thing that can be classified as unpaid volunteerism... and yes, being the Bobs, the NANOGers are exhibiting this unpaid volunteerism!
'Couse bob doesn't pay claire anything but denise pays claire to receive packets for denise, my packets are intended for denise and bob and claire have a peering agreement in which they agree to swap already-paid traffic directly rather than both paying ed to do it for them.
So it ain't free and at each step there is a contractual obligation to at least one of the sender or receiver.
Regards, Bill
-- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004