nanog mailing list archives
Re: Peering versus Transit
From: Bill Woodcock <woody () zocalo net>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 00:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
> There are two ways to have packets go... > adding bogus static or whatever routes > or by pointing default. Both are malicious. WRT the latter, I completely agree that pointing a default at anyone whom you're not buying transit from is theft, and absolutely beyond condonement. WRT the former, I simply cannot fathom, and no one other than Sean has yet presented an argument explaining why it's malicious to deliver a packet to its addressee's ISP. Why should I, as an ISP, not prefer that all other ISPs deliver packets to my customers as quickly, efficiently, directly, and inexpensively as possible? Why should I prefer a more expensive or less reliable route, or expect any other ISP to do so? I realize that this is about the hundredth time somebody has asked exactly that question, but people are just going to keep asking until there's a convincing reason, or people stop suggesting that other people use less-efficient paths. It is, after all, an obvious question. > Example, please, when somebody conforming to the stated policies > was denied peering? (Plase note that the process... may be > rather lengthy... Okay, it's _widely rumored_ that it may be difficult to establish new peering sessions with some large ISPs, at the moment. :-) But this again distracts from the question at hand, since you assume that "stated policies" should institutionalize unequal relationships. Assuming that skirts the argument, just as nonsequiturs about default routes do. -Bill ________________________________________________________________________________ bill woodcock woody () zocalo net woody () applelink apple com user () host domain com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Peering versus Transit, (continued)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Barney Wolff (Sep 29)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Peter Galbavy (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Neil J. McRae (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Alex.Bligh (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Peter Galbavy (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Bill Woodcock (Sep 29)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Vadim Antonov (Sep 29)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Dorian R. Kim (Sep 29)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Bill Woodcock (Sep 29)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Sean Doran (Sep 29)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Vadim Antonov (Sep 29)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Bill Woodcock (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Matt Zimmerman (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Jeff Young (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Matthew Kaufman (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Sean Doran (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Barney Wolff (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Dorian R. Kim (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Dorian R. Kim (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Dorian R. Kim (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Barney Wolff (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit William Allen Simpson (Sep 30)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Vadim Antonov (Sep 30)
(Thread continues...)
- Re: Peering versus Transit Barney Wolff (Sep 29)