In article <Pine.BSF.3.96.980815012720.27167B-100000@workhorse.iMach.com>, "Forrest W. Christian" <forrestc@iMach.com> wrote:
After all, it's the BBN customers REQUESTING the data from exodus, not the other way around.
This argument goes around and around every time. Unless you have a customer relationship with Exodus or BBN there is no point in arguing about what should happen with this particular case, and there is no point at all in arguing about what is the morally correct thing for the general case. The only way to determine the value of connecting network A to network B, in either sign or magnitude, is for A and B to negotiate a price, which may even be zero. And that's what's happening here, albeit in a unusually painful and visible way. If you have an opinion and are a customer of BBN or Exodus, tell them your opinion. Otherwise there is no need to care. -- Shields, CrossLink.
On Sat, Aug 15, 1998 at 09:49:06PM +0000, Michael Shields wrote:
In article <Pine.BSF.3.96.980815012720.27167B-100000@workhorse.iMach.com>, "Forrest W. Christian" <forrestc@iMach.com> wrote:
After all, it's the BBN customers REQUESTING the data from exodus, not the other way around.
This argument goes around and around every time. Unless you have a customer relationship with Exodus or BBN there is no point in arguing about what should happen with this particular case, and there is no point at all in arguing about what is the morally correct thing for the general case. The only way to determine the value of connecting network A to network B, in either sign or magnitude, is for A and B to negotiate a price, which may even be zero. And that's what's happening here, albeit in a unusually painful and visible way.
If you have an opinion and are a customer of BBN or Exodus, tell them your opinion. Otherwise there is no need to care. -- Shields, CrossLink.
Actually, if you're a BBN customer, I strongly recommend that you tell them by taking your contract, placing it in the paper shredder, and sending them the chips it emits. Then buy connectivity from someone who has a corporate view that when you pay someone for transit, you are buying transit to all of the net they can reach and not just those who they can pry yet more money from (especially considering that you already paid them for that service!) -- -- Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin http://www.mcs.net/ | T1's from $600 monthly / All Lines K56Flex/DOV | NEW! Corporate ISDN Prices dropped by up to 50%! Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| EXCLUSIVE NEW FEATURE ON ALL PERSONAL ACCOUNTS Fax: [+1 312 803-4929] | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost
This issue is of specific importance to any individual responsible for running an ISP. Just as in the legal field the outcome of this issue may set a precedence for future events that will severely impact anyone wanting to become a tier one provider. The Internet was founded on the principle of free interconnectivity between network segments. It is fundamentally important that these ideals be extended to the future of the Internet, if it is to have a future. No company should have the right to force another to pay for connectivity simply because the latter has not been around since the beginning or they are not a telco. The next company on BBN's hit list may be yours. Mark *** Disclaimer *** The opinions expressed here are just those, opinions. They are neither the offical statements of my employer or endorced as such. Michael Shields wrote:
In article <Pine.BSF.3.96.980815012720.27167B-100000@workhorse.iMach.com>, "Forrest W. Christian" <forrestc@iMach.com> wrote:
After all, it's the BBN customers REQUESTING the data from exodus, not the other way around.
This argument goes around and around every time. Unless you have a customer relationship with Exodus or BBN there is no point in arguing about what should happen with this particular case, and there is no point at all in arguing about what is the morally correct thing for the general case. The only way to determine the value of connecting network A to network B, in either sign or magnitude, is for A and B to negotiate a price, which may even be zero. And that's what's happening here, albeit in a unusually painful and visible way.
If you have an opinion and are a customer of BBN or Exodus, tell them your opinion. Otherwise there is no need to care. -- Shields, CrossLink.
-- *************************************************************************** Mark Tripod - Senior Network Architect - Exodus Communications http://www.exodus.net - (888) 2-EXODUS - support@exodus.net ASN 3967 - NASDAQ (EXDS) - Direct: (408) 346-2389
fundamentally important that these ideals be extended to the future of the Internet, if it is to have a future. No company should have the right to force another to pay for connectivity simply because the latter has not been around since the beginning or they are not a telco.
BBN is answerable to their customers and shareholders and not to your or my ideals of how the Internet should work. -- Shields, CrossLink.
On Sun, 16 Aug 1998, Michael Shields wrote:
fundamentally important that these ideals be extended to the future of the Internet, if it is to have a future. No company should have the right to force another to pay for connectivity simply because the latter has not been around since the beginning or they are not a telco.
BBN is answerable to their customers and shareholders and not to your or my ideals of how the Internet should work.
I agree with you from a business perspective. It's not our right as "innocent bystanders" with no financial interest in the company to have influence on corporate decisions. But, I think that what BBN is doing isn't the right thing. Instead of putting the work into solving the problem of how to value the peering relationship in something other than the quid pro quo metric of bytes, they're simply going home. They don't have the right answer, nor do I. Figuring it out has got to happen. Absent another, more appropriate, forum having the discussion, here is best. If none of us cared, would we be up at four o'clock in the morning saying so?
Shields, CrossLink.
Have fun, Todd --- Todd Nagengast /_\\//_\ Network Hero v. 907.562.4638 tsgd@alaska.net \ //\\ / Internet Alaska, Inc. f. 907.562.1677 My name is CCIEMontoya. You smurfed my router. Prepare to DIE! 1024/DB3041FD BE 60 73 FE 61 C5 A4 F3 C8 13 3C 93 C8 63 1F 5C
On Sat, Aug 15, 1998 at 09:49:06PM +0000, Michael Shields wrote:
"Forrest W. Christian" <forrestc@iMach.com> wrote:
After all, it's the BBN customers REQUESTING the data from exodus, not the other way around.
This argument goes around and around every time. Unless you have a customer relationship with Exodus or BBN there is no point in arguing about what should happen with this particular case, and there is no point at all in arguing about what is the morally correct thing for the general case. The only way to determine the value of connecting network A to network B, in either sign or magnitude, is for A and B to negotiate a price, which may even be zero. And that's what's happening here, albeit in a unusually painful and visible way.
If you have an opinion and are a customer of BBN or Exodus, tell them your opinion. Otherwise there is no need to care.
I disagree. Precedent, m'boy, precedent. There _is_ a reasonable derivation from the available facts, or at least a pattern to create one... _if_ people who have to make the judgement call don't see fit to toss it in the trash. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Member of the Technical Staff Unsolicited Commercial Emailers Sued The Suncoast Freenet "Two words: Darth Doogie." -- Jason Colby, Tampa Bay, Florida on alt.fan.heinlein +1 813 790 7592 Managing Editor, Top Of The Key sports e-zine ------------ http://www.totk.com
participants (5)
-
Jay R. Ashworth -
Karl Denninger -
mark＠exodus.net -
shields＠crosslink.net -
Todd 'Mr Vendor Relations' Nagengast