Re: Peering Table Question

["Mark Borchers" <markb () infi net>]

You omitted the fact that the 1500 byte packets carry a bunch
of paid advertising, and thus are already revenue-producing.

On 20 Apr 00, at 1:42, I Am Not An Isp wrote:

> Simplistic example: Network A hosts big web sites.  Network B has a 
> gazillion dial-up users.  The two networks peer at MAE-East and 
> MAE-West.  The web sites are in San Jose, the dial-up users are in DC.
>
> Typical TCP flow looks like this: 1500 byte packet goes from web server to 
> MAE-West on Network A, then transfers to Network B (because of "hot potato" 
> routing) and comes across the country to DC destined for dialup user.  Then 
> a 64 byte ACK goes from DC to MAE-East on Network B, then transfers to 
> Network A where it rides to San Jose.
>
> In Other Words: Network B is carrying 1500 byte packets 3000 miles, and 
> Network A is carrying 64 byte packets 3000 miles.

<snipped for brevity>
 
> In summary, there is nothing wrong with settlements to help off-set unequal 
> network costs.  It is a perfectly valid business practice.  Nor, IMHO, does 
> it make one network a "customer" of the other.  The two networks are just 
> trying to share everything equally, including network costs.