I disagree ... but sure do appreciate your tone ... :) Regards, Gary -----Original Message----- From: Daniel Golding [mailto:dgolding@burtongroup.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 4:32 PM To: Gary Hale; Michel Py; Gordon Cook; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Backbone IP network Economics - peering and transit Cynical? Gee, I hope so. Anyone who reads that sort of fluff needs to be cynical. Lack of appropriate cynicism led, in part, to the "recent unpleasantness" in the telecommunications industry. Words like "enabling", "leveraging", "mindshare", "b2b", "e-*", "i-*", et al, are considered harmful to fruitful operational discussion :) -- Daniel Golding Network and Telecommunications Strategies Burton Group On 4/20/04 2:17 PM, "Gary Hale" <ghale@globalinternetworking.com> wrote:

Daniel,

That is way too cynical ... and does not address the question of whether building your own transport ever runs counter to the Internet as a consortium.

There are business justifications that underpin peering relationships ... and they are based on understanding (or ... "philosophy") ....

Gary

-----Original Message----- From: Daniel Golding [mailto:dgolding@burtongroup.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 10:36 AM To: Gary Hale; Michel Py; Gordon Cook; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Backbone IP network Economics - peering and transit

On 4/20/04 8:45 AM, "Gary Hale" <ghale@globalinternetworking.com> wrote:

...

The question is too simplistic ... It is not (simply) a matter of

...

vs. big or being on your own network from source-to-destination. Peering is an enabler ... and gives all an opportunity to share content globally ... kinda' fundamental to the Internet consortium.

Is your question, 'Since fiber is so cheap, why doesn't everyone build an autonomous, facilities-based, global "Internet" network that competes for narrowband/broadband "pullers" of data and hosting/data

small centers/etc.

...

for content providers ("pulled-fromers" or "pushers" of data)?

Gary

-----Original Message----- From: Michel Py [mailto:michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us] Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 10:46 PM To: Gordon Cook; nanog@merit.edu Subject: RE: Backbone IP network Economics - peering and transit

...

Peering? Who needs peering if transit can be had for $20 per megabit per second?

The smaller guys that don't buy transit buy the gigabit.

Michel.

Gary,

"Peering is an enabler" "gives all an opportunity to share content globally" "fundamental to the Internet consortium"

This is like the "greatest hits" compendium collected from various failed 1990's service provider business plans :)

People should be careful. Peering is a business/networking arrangement that can save them money (or not). Those who try to imbue it with philosophical significance must be viewed with skepticism.

Daniel Golding Network and Telecommunications Strategies Burton Group