Simple Peering Agreement
Does anyone have a simple (1-2 page) peering agreement in plain English they would care to share offlist? Thanks, Justin -- Justin Wilson <j2sw@mtin.net> Aol & Yahoo IM: j2sw http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw Follow me on Twitter
are you any good in Maths? http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routing%2... maybe a PhD will find a point in using this part of their self-development how far can you go and what is your position in the world? I guess linking countries is easy if you are offer the position but you can't move from there can you? so the revenue in peering agreements not free peering but private peering is maybe what they look fw to achieve. i guess a new model might be under research as this one is an old IPv4 one and IPv6 peering agreements are in production ......maybe with internet 2 too....... --- On Fri, 6/15/12, Justin Wilson <lists@mtin.net> wrote: From: Justin Wilson <lists@mtin.net> Subject: Simple Peering Agreement To: "NANOG (nanog@nanog.org)" <nanog@nanog.org> Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 7:24 PM Does anyone have a simple (1-2 page) peering agreement in plain English they would care to share offlist? Thanks, Justin -- Justin Wilson <j2sw@mtin.net> Aol & Yahoo IM: j2sw http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News http://www.twitter.com/j2sw Follow me on Twitter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Isabel Dias wrote:
are you any good in Maths? http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routing%2...
If you're good in maths, you'll realize that the simple peering agreement is the one that covers 99.5% of interconnections, and is well enough understood that it need not be committed to paper. :-) http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011.p... -Bill -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJP23eFAAoJEG+kcEsoi3+HSJ8P+wTeik0+xr1o5R8hTVsCKsrI +xwxAOzE5yjt8MXqAKqOWCFqWBWy1xaXcetUiKW/0SKjK+5Uz2OVUsPHnDc6xX/k clhM5b2rsB7T5NkRzBO26kfCMXEAL1v9peafxzc3XWjXuOtbf6UnBwH6+OIgiLrM +1Sbj/fVI/CwFYhpRRPW77itttfS6srka5uz06vB0XN69VQ7mn/bESOChaypf31K Vn3MZhn6byCVDcyrEOH5QtK5DAW1EQrZLbZA9e6VwrrartSjiwP9N9QuVGZ0fXhr uKnlQwxJXX1z/hC1REQcYLN4yuRcEFvKJj1t/3yuOoA00TvWZyYiKtzdTnUNmK5c BFPImwyod/X0qZHTfzik+dIHbO5vlS31jL/I4xmKn5PYKjNXSODx4viN+C39Je+r IR07ppVUv8du4cwDzxDVldFuT8HGv3X3fS5NI1iJUiJFqD5fR/6y1E4EOhGZkVa3 DI1WwEcSS/mJiW0BgHhuWmHAK++mXANP8qKWZcVNmP7BDwJ8hUKg4tltepVkyvUp VyPc4vOns/06TvEM3F8i2nCuCxDxhftsvHnGepYijvSPko25NDCOE5g2VBlITCf2 neGZ8xttsnTiAqGG5oHYsMWyMg1kjodGHMR2oBzPeNUTUMyOJFM2Ro8TfDvX9b1/ 43LgwdG9N3ExiUpAmKcO =lm/u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I need paperwork to justify several things the bean counters want to see on paper. It's hard to present why you need 5 additional 10Gig ports when you have nothing on paper of why those ports are being used. Justin -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net> Date: Friday, June 15, 2012 1:57 PM To: "NANOG (nanog@nanog.org)" <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Simple Peering Agreement
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Isabel Dias wrote:
are you any good in Maths?
http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routin g%20Technologies%20and%20Internet%20Peering%20Agr.%202001.pdf
If you're good in maths, you'll realize that the simple peering agreement is the one that covers 99.5% of interconnections, and is well enough understood that it need not be committed to paper. :-)
http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011 .pdf
-Bill
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJP23eFAAoJEG+kcEsoi3+HSJ8P+wTeik0+xr1o5R8hTVsCKsrI +xwxAOzE5yjt8MXqAKqOWCFqWBWy1xaXcetUiKW/0SKjK+5Uz2OVUsPHnDc6xX/k clhM5b2rsB7T5NkRzBO26kfCMXEAL1v9peafxzc3XWjXuOtbf6UnBwH6+OIgiLrM +1Sbj/fVI/CwFYhpRRPW77itttfS6srka5uz06vB0XN69VQ7mn/bESOChaypf31K Vn3MZhn6byCVDcyrEOH5QtK5DAW1EQrZLbZA9e6VwrrartSjiwP9N9QuVGZ0fXhr uKnlQwxJXX1z/hC1REQcYLN4yuRcEFvKJj1t/3yuOoA00TvWZyYiKtzdTnUNmK5c BFPImwyod/X0qZHTfzik+dIHbO5vlS31jL/I4xmKn5PYKjNXSODx4viN+C39Je+r IR07ppVUv8du4cwDzxDVldFuT8HGv3X3fS5NI1iJUiJFqD5fR/6y1E4EOhGZkVa3 DI1WwEcSS/mJiW0BgHhuWmHAK++mXANP8qKWZcVNmP7BDwJ8hUKg4tltepVkyvUp VyPc4vOns/06TvEM3F8i2nCuCxDxhftsvHnGepYijvSPko25NDCOE5g2VBlITCf2 neGZ8xttsnTiAqGG5oHYsMWyMg1kjodGHMR2oBzPeNUTUMyOJFM2Ro8TfDvX9b1/ 43LgwdG9N3ExiUpAmKcO =lm/u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:10:14 -0400, Justin Wilson said:
I need paperwork to justify several things the bean counters want to see on paper. It's hard to present why you need 5 additional 10Gig ports when you have nothing on paper of why those ports are being used.
If you can't already enumerate the use of those 5 ports, a piece of paper isn't going to help fix the real problem.
http://www.as9009.net/policy/ --- On Fri, 6/15/12, Justin Wilson <lists@mtin.net> wrote: From: Justin Wilson <lists@mtin.net> Subject: Re: Simple Peering Agreement To: "NANOG (nanog@nanog.org)" <nanog@nanog.org> Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 8:10 PM I need paperwork to justify several things the bean counters want to see on paper. It's hard to present why you need 5 additional 10Gig ports when you have nothing on paper of why those ports are being used. Justin -----Original Message----- From: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net> Date: Friday, June 15, 2012 1:57 PM To: "NANOG (nanog@nanog.org)" <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Simple Peering Agreement
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Isabel Dias wrote:
are you any good in Maths?
http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routin g%20Technologies%20and%20Internet%20Peering%20Agr.%202001.pdf
If you're good in maths, you'll realize that the simple peering agreement is the one that covers 99.5% of interconnections, and is well enough understood that it need not be committed to paper. :-)
http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011 .pdf
-Bill
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJP23eFAAoJEG+kcEsoi3+HSJ8P+wTeik0+xr1o5R8hTVsCKsrI +xwxAOzE5yjt8MXqAKqOWCFqWBWy1xaXcetUiKW/0SKjK+5Uz2OVUsPHnDc6xX/k clhM5b2rsB7T5NkRzBO26kfCMXEAL1v9peafxzc3XWjXuOtbf6UnBwH6+OIgiLrM +1Sbj/fVI/CwFYhpRRPW77itttfS6srka5uz06vB0XN69VQ7mn/bESOChaypf31K Vn3MZhn6byCVDcyrEOH5QtK5DAW1EQrZLbZA9e6VwrrartSjiwP9N9QuVGZ0fXhr uKnlQwxJXX1z/hC1REQcYLN4yuRcEFvKJj1t/3yuOoA00TvWZyYiKtzdTnUNmK5c BFPImwyod/X0qZHTfzik+dIHbO5vlS31jL/I4xmKn5PYKjNXSODx4viN+C39Je+r IR07ppVUv8du4cwDzxDVldFuT8HGv3X3fS5NI1iJUiJFqD5fR/6y1E4EOhGZkVa3 DI1WwEcSS/mJiW0BgHhuWmHAK++mXANP8qKWZcVNmP7BDwJ8hUKg4tltepVkyvUp VyPc4vOns/06TvEM3F8i2nCuCxDxhftsvHnGepYijvSPko25NDCOE5g2VBlITCf2 neGZ8xttsnTiAqGG5oHYsMWyMg1kjodGHMR2oBzPeNUTUMyOJFM2Ro8TfDvX9b1/ 43LgwdG9N3ExiUpAmKcO =lm/u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
http://gogonetlive.com/pdf/gogonet_live2/chris_grundemann.pdf --- On Fri, 6/15/12, Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net> wrote: From: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net> Subject: Re: Simple Peering Agreement To: "NANOG (nanog@nanog.org)" <nanog@nanog.org> Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 7:57 PM -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Isabel Dias wrote:
are you any good in Maths? http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routing%2...
If you're good in maths, you'll realize that the simple peering agreement is the one that covers 99.5% of interconnections, and is well enough understood that it need not be committed to paper. :-) http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011.p... -Bill -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJP23eFAAoJEG+kcEsoi3+HSJ8P+wTeik0+xr1o5R8hTVsCKsrI +xwxAOzE5yjt8MXqAKqOWCFqWBWy1xaXcetUiKW/0SKjK+5Uz2OVUsPHnDc6xX/k clhM5b2rsB7T5NkRzBO26kfCMXEAL1v9peafxzc3XWjXuOtbf6UnBwH6+OIgiLrM +1Sbj/fVI/CwFYhpRRPW77itttfS6srka5uz06vB0XN69VQ7mn/bESOChaypf31K Vn3MZhn6byCVDcyrEOH5QtK5DAW1EQrZLbZA9e6VwrrartSjiwP9N9QuVGZ0fXhr uKnlQwxJXX1z/hC1REQcYLN4yuRcEFvKJj1t/3yuOoA00TvWZyYiKtzdTnUNmK5c BFPImwyod/X0qZHTfzik+dIHbO5vlS31jL/I4xmKn5PYKjNXSODx4viN+C39Je+r IR07ppVUv8du4cwDzxDVldFuT8HGv3X3fS5NI1iJUiJFqD5fR/6y1E4EOhGZkVa3 DI1WwEcSS/mJiW0BgHhuWmHAK++mXANP8qKWZcVNmP7BDwJ8hUKg4tltepVkyvUp VyPc4vOns/06TvEM3F8i2nCuCxDxhftsvHnGepYijvSPko25NDCOE5g2VBlITCf2 neGZ8xttsnTiAqGG5oHYsMWyMg1kjodGHMR2oBzPeNUTUMyOJFM2Ro8TfDvX9b1/ 43LgwdG9N3ExiUpAmKcO =lm/u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 15/06/2012 18:24, Justin Wilson wrote:
Does anyone have a simple (1-2 page) peering agreement in plain English they would care to share offlist?
http://www.google.com/search?q=peering%20agreement%20%2Bfiletype%3Adoc Nick
Also: s/doc/PDF/g Sent from my iPhone On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:37, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
On 15/06/2012 18:24, Justin Wilson wrote:
Does anyone have a simple (1-2 page) peering agreement in plain English they would care to share offlist?
http://www.google.com/search?q=peering%20agreement%20%2Bfiletype%3Adoc
Nick
participants (6)
-
Bill Woodcock -
Garrett Skjelstad -
Isabel Dias -
Justin Wilson -
Nick Hilliard -
valdis.kletnieks＠vt.edu