--- jra@baylink.com wrote: From: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> In the wake of their GBLX acquisition, Level 3 has announced (already) what its new peering policy will be, in this press release posted at Telecom Ramblings: http://newswire.telecomramblings.com/2011/10/level-3-announces-new-policy-fo... ----------------------------------------------------- Isn't it just more of the same, or am I brainnumb today? "...each party bears a reasonably equal share of backbone burdens – taking into account the amount of traffic carried by each party and the distance over which that traffic is carried." "One fundamental aspect of the new policy is a requirement that carriers adjust routing practices and interconnection locations so that the distance and volume of traffic carried by each party on their backbone network remains equitable." "If one party to a settlement-free peering relationship is carrying far less traffic over far less distances than the other party, the policy would require changes to interconnection locations and routing to more equitably distribute the burden of carrying traffic and thus preserve a fair settlement-free peering relationship" Hopefully, I am not accidentally trolling as has happened in the past... :-) scott
On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Scott Weeks <surfer@mauigateway.com> wrote:
Isn't it just more of the same, or am I brainnumb today?
What's changed is the introduction of "bit miles" as a means of calculating equality, where traffic ratios might previously have been used. Explained further, as pointed out on-list earlier: http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021703819 http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021703818 What will be interesting is whether new peering adjacencies crop up as a result of the new policy (I can think of several "smaller" global networks which now qualify, as it's written), or if this is just posturing on Level 3's part. The next few months will be interesting for sure... -a
participants (2)
-
Adam Rothschild -
Scott Weeks