nanog mailing list archives
Re: AOL & Cogent
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 16:43:18 -0500
Well, it only took the press 9 days to get a story out, I guess that isn't all bad. The Washington Post now has a story on this issue: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45819-2002Dec27.html It claims AOL wants $75000/month. If we use the $50/meg Andrew Partan posted that would be an even 1.5 Gig, which is an entirely plausible number for the traffic level (given previous rumor of 2xOC-12, eg 1.2 Gig, recently upgraded to 2xOC-48). I'll offer two comments from my own opinion: - Peering should cost significantly less than transit. At least half, probably less. If you have 1.5 Gig, getting $50 a meg transit is trivial today. I can't imagine any company paying $50 a meg for peering, no matter what the circumstances. Perhaps that was the point though. - In my opinion, if you want to enforce a ratio and charge people who do not meet it, the charge should only be on the difference. That is, say it was 1500 Mbps Cogent->AOL, and 500Mbps AOL->Cogent. The first 1000 Mbps (2x500, 2:1 ratio), Cogent->AOL should be free, as they would be if there was less traffic. Charging for the extra 500, while not something I advocate, would be fair. To make it such that 1000Mbps would be "free", but 1001 Mbps means to pay for the first 1000 is just stupid. People don't generally accept pricing models that have large jumps in them, they want something progressive. I wonder what Cogent's response would have been if the charge was only for the amount over 2:1, and was a reasonable price for peering, perhaps $15/Meg and AOL gets to pick the locations.... -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request () tmbg org, www.tmbg.org
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- AOL & Cogent Andrew Partan (Dec 19)
- RE: AOL & Cogent Deepak Jain (Dec 20)
- RE: AOL & Cogent Stephen J. Wilcox (Dec 20)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Neil J. McRae (Dec 21)
- RE: AOL & Cogent Stephen J. Wilcox (Dec 20)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Leo Bicknell (Dec 28)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Richard A Steenbergen (Dec 28)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Leo Bicknell (Dec 28)
- Re: AOL & Cogent David Schwartz (Dec 28)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Paul Vixie (Dec 28)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Mike Leber (Dec 29)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Paul Vixie (Dec 29)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Stephen J. Wilcox (Dec 29)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Paul Vixie (Dec 29)
- Re: AOL & Cogent David Diaz (Dec 29)
- Re: AOL & Cogent Richard A Steenbergen (Dec 28)
- Re: AOL & Cogent John Kristoff (Dec 29)
- RE: AOL & Cogent Deepak Jain (Dec 20)