lol
21.08.2022 04:28 tarihinde [email protected] yazdı:
Good thing they have someone with a dish washing skill-set to clean up
their inbox's for them.
On Saturday, August 20, 2022, 06:01:34 p.m. PDT, Peter Potvin via
NANOG <[email protected]> wrote:
Hey all,
Removing Cogent personnel and peering departments from this thread as
I'm sure they don't appreciate the nonsense coming from this list.
Regards,
Peter Potvin | Executive Director
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Accuris Technologies Ltd.*
11-300 Earl Grey Drive, Suite #124, Kanata, Ontario K2T1C1 Canada
Email: [email protected]
Office: +1 (877) 352-6105
Network Operations Centre: +1 (877) 321-1662
On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 8:51 PM VOLKAN KIRIK <[email protected]> wrote:
yea whatever..
its upto mike leber and dave schaeffer to decide. they can either
accept or reject the solution
I have been always believing content creator/provider should pay
expenses (at least excess traffic).
because they put their server in some datacenter and reach all of
the internet.. their backbone expenses are less..
i can understand that todays datacenters including he.net
<http://he.net> are interested to participate in 200-300 IXPs.
well that acceptable. it should be considered too
so i would offer both companies 3 cent per mbps for excess traffic.
ok bye
21.08.2022 03:25 tarihinde Forrest Christian (List Account) yazdı:
But that traffic was likely requested by and for the benefit of
the person the traffic is being sent to.
I've always found the argument that the quantity of traffic is
the indicator of who should pay to be questionable.
If I'm an end user on an eyeball user and request a big download
or streaming from a provider, isn't it me that caused that
traffic to flow? One could argue that I am the one that needs to
pay.
On the other hand, one could argue that it's the provider of the
content that I requested that needs to pay, since it's their
content which is being distributed.
When you get to peering between two providers it's almost
impossible to decide who needs to pay. As I mentioned above,
passing that traffic is actually to the benefit of both providers.
About the only settlement I could see is where one of the
providers is bearing most of the transport costs. For example a
regional provider only peering at one exchange point might expect
some settlement costs with a big international provider that is
effectively carrying their traffic both directions around the
globe. But the quantity of that type of traffic is likely
minimal in the grand scheme of things. Even then one might
argue that connectivity to the small provider is still valuable
to the customers of the large provider.
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022, 9:32 AM VOLKAN KIRIK <[email protected]>
wrote:
the more uploading side pays each month for the excess amount.
as content networks are supposed to pay expenses.
what do you think?
19.08.2022 18:28 tarihinde Mike Hammett yazdı:
The problem them becomes *who* pays? When do the tables turn
as to who pays?
The alpha gets paid and the beta does the paying?
The network with more POPs gets paid?
The network with more downstream ASes gets paid?
Is it the same for IPv4 as it is for IPv6?
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
<https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From: *"VOLKAN KIRIK" <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*To: *"Rubens Kuhl" <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*Cc: *[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
*Sent: *Friday, August 19, 2022 10:22:00 AM
*Subject: *Re: cogent and henet not peering
this is 50/50 situation. nobody has to peer for free.
but everyone can.
lets just say above 1:1 ratio he.net <http://he.net> pays
their own ip transit price to cogent for paid peering excess
amount and both sides monitor traffic
we can solve this issue by becoming middlemen worldwide...
both operators are cheap and they could all compete in quality.
level3 pays comcast reasonable (cheap) price (under NDA
maybe?). why wouldnt mleber?
but to make it fair, as he.net <http://he.net> becomes ww
tier-1 operator day-by-day, lets just limit pricing to
excess amount of traffic
thanks for reading
would appreciate your support
19.08.2022 18:09 tarihinde Rubens Kuhl yazdı:
OTOH, knowing that Cogent loves splitting the global Internet is onegood reason
to not contract their services.I think they sell traffic to their private Intranet. Which
is huge,but doesn't encompass the whole Internet.RubensOn Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 12:04 PM
VOLKAN KIRIK<[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
lets just say cogent gives 400GE in each pop they have in common withhe.net
<http://he.net> for free.BUT they will rate-limithe.net <http://he.net>
links to previous month's 95th percentile upload or download (which is minimum) rate (each
month)to make ratio 1:1... to make downstream and upstream traffics fair...okay?fine?come
on people,segmentation is bad.
The information contained in this message may be privileged,
confidential and protected from disclosure. This message is intended
only for the designated recipient(s). It is subject to access, review
and disclosure by the sender's Email System Administrator. If you have
received this message in error, please advise by return e-mail so that
our address records can be corrected and please delete immediately
without reading, copying or forwarding to others. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
Copyright © 2022 Accuris Technologies Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
L'information contenue dans ce message pourrait être de nature
privilégiée, confidentielle et protégée contre toute divulgation. Ce
message est destiné à l'usage exclusif du(des) destinataire(s)
visé(s). Le gestionnaire de système du courrier électronique de
l'expéditeur pourrait avoir accès à ce message, l'examiner et le
divulguer. Si ce message vous est transmis par erreur, veuillez nous
en aviser par courrier électronique à notre adresse, afin que l'on
puisse corriger nos registres, puis veuillez le supprimer
immédiatement, sans le lire, le copier ou le transmettre à des tiers.
Tout examen, toute utilisation, divulgation ou distribution non
autorisé de cette information est interdit.
Droit d'auteur © 2022 Accuris Technologies Ltd. Tous droits réservés.
