Re: BBN/GTEI

[Joe Provo - Network Architect <jprovo () ma ultranet com>]

[I really wasn't going to get involved in this mire, but this is too
easy. Standard disclaimers abound.]

> > Sure, but only the assymetry that results from BBN customers ASKING for more
> > than they OFFER.
>
> Or is it the asymmetry that results from Exodus customers OFFERING more
> than they ASK FOR?
...so now you are looking to dictate what business prodcuts/models
someone uses?

> other. Just because long distance phone calling introduced the purely
> artificial concept that the initiator of the transaction pays for it does
> not mean we should analyze IP traffic in the same way. 
"Artificiality" applies in the telephone model, where the circuit is set
up and you can't/won't/don't know about the payload [which end talks
more? is there a lot of silence? does the quality suck?].  Packet
switching shows a lot about the payload [packet sizes, packet frequency, 
and retransmissions] from both sides.

> In the past we have
> considered the initiator of IP transactions to be irrelevant and had
> no-charge peering for networks that basically send a similar number of
> bytes to what they receive.
>
> So what do we do when that is no longer the case? 
The requests handled by pointy-clicky-"dub dub dub"; great wodges 
of traffic being burned on lossy protocols.  The traffic doesn't
spontaneously decide to slam down pipes to non-path-discovery Windoze
dialups.  The humans behind the dialups asked for something (albeit,
they had no forwarnings about adverts, pictures, applets, etc etc.).

Back to life,

Joe

--
Joe Provo, Network Architect                         508.229.8400 x3006
Commercial Internet Services Group                   Fax   508.229.2375
UltraNet Communications, Inc., an RCN Company        <jprovo () ultra net>