Note the distinction in the new peering relationship requirement -- only direct adjacencies with other transit-providing ASes count.
...or did that change happen some time ago and I'm just noticing it now (?) TV On Oct 13, 2011, at 2:13 PM, Scott Weeks wrote: > --- a...@latency.net wrote: > From: Adam Rothschild <a...@latency.net> > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Scott Weeks <sur...@mauigateway.com> wrote: >> Isn't it just more of the same, or am I brainnumb today? > > What's changed is the introduction of "bit miles" as a means of > calculating equality, where traffic ratios might previously have been > used. Explained further, as pointed out on-list earlier: > > http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021703819 > http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7021703818 > > What will be interesting is whether new peering adjacencies crop up as > a result of the new policy (I can think of several "smaller" global > networks which now qualify, as it's written), or if this is just > posturing on Level 3's part. The next few months will be interesting > for sure... > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > I do recall the bit-miles conversations, but didn't tie that into this. doh! > Thanks for the links. That kind of detail is what I should've been looking > for and it explains everything. > > scott >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
