On Jun 19, 2013, at 6:03 PM, Randy Bush <[email protected]> wrote: > as someone who does not really buy the balanced traffic story, some are > eyeballs and some are eye candy and that's just life, seems like a lot > of words to justify various attempts at control, higgenbottom's point.
I agree with Randy, but will go one further.
Requiring a balanced ratio is extremely bad business because it incentivizes
your competitors to compete in your home market.
You're a content provider who can't meet ratio requirements? You go into the
eyeball space, perhaps by purchasing an eyeball provider, or creating one.
Google Fiber, anyone?
Having a requirement that's basically "you must compete with me on all the
products I sell" is a really dumb peering policy, but that's how the big guys
use ratio.
--
Leo Bicknell - [email protected] - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
