That doesn’t seem very offlist…
> On Aug 20, 2022, at 19:12, VOLKAN KIRIK <volki...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > you can always be at my service. > > as i am the god. > > working 7/24 at no markup. > > +905520094078 > > god's hotline. IM always responded. calls maybe. > > i mean the allah. > > > > 21.08.2022 05:06 tarihinde jkinne...@yahoo.ca yazdı: >> I am still all riled up. I can't get over him sending that message. I'm glad >> I want to check out his linkedin profile. >> >> Happy I could be of service to you. :) >>> On Saturday, August 20, 2022, 07:00:15 p.m. PDT, VOLKAN KIRIK >>> <volki...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> if you are happy i am happy. >>> >>> i dont care negative people much. >>> >>> >>> >>> 21.08.2022 04:53 tarihinde jkinne...@yahoo.ca yazdı: >> >> Hey Volkan, >> >> I just emailed the list moderator to let them know it was optional to >> post my message to the list. As long as you know some twit with >> three years experience running around calling himself executive >> director just harassed you, I'm happy. >> >> Have a great day! >> >> Jason >> On Saturday, August 20, 2022, 06:50:05 p.m. PDT, VOLKAN KIRIK >> <volki...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> lol >> >> 21.08.2022 04:28 tarihinde jkinne...@yahoo.ca 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 >> <nanog@nanog.org> 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: peter.pot...@accuristechnologies.ca >> Office: +1 (877) 352-6105 >> Network Operations Centre: +1 (877) 321-1662 >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 8:51 PM VOLKAN KIRIK <volki...@gmail.com> 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 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 <volki...@gmail.com> 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 >>>> >>>> Midwest Internet Exchange >>>> >>>> The Brothers WISP >>>> >>>> From: "VOLKAN KIRIK" <volki...@gmail.com> >>>> To: "Rubens Kuhl" <rube...@gmail.com> >>>> Cc: nanog@nanog.org, dschaef...@cogentco.com, peer...@cogentco.com >>>> 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 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 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 >>>> <volki...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> lets just say cogent gives 400GE in each pop they have in common with >>>> he.net for free.BUT they will rate-limit 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.
