nanog mailing list archives

Re: New peering criteria


From: Vijay Gill <vijay () umbc edu>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 17:12:46 -0400


On 6 Jun 2001, Sean Donelan wrote:

I agree, but how do you decide who is hurt more?

Turn off connectivity and see.

And therefore who should be the vendor and who is the customer?

See above.

Is the "bigger" network always the vendor, or is the network with more
content the vendor, or the network with more eyeballs the vendor?  That's
what I don't understand about the "balance" requirement.  Ok, so you know
the traffic is imbalanced, but whose fault/hurt is it when traffic is
imbalanced?  And who is responsible for "fixing" the imbalance in traffic?

The simple answer is I'm the vendor and you are the customer, so you should
pay me.

The simple answer is: Do the people you are selling to ask how your
connectivity to <Network A> is AND if Network A's sales people get asked
the same question about _your_ network.

If not, then giddy up and start following the "sales process (C) 2001 smd"

/vijay "time to put the peer back in peering" gill




Current thread: