On 5/14/2014 4:27 AM, Roland Dobbins wrote:
On May 14, 2014, at 3:11 PM, Matthew Petach <mpet...@netflight.com>
wrote:
I'm constantly amazed at how access networks think they can charge
2/3 the price of full transit for just their routes when they
represent less than 1/10th of the overall traffic volume.
My guess is that from the perspective of the access providers, they
aren't selling traffic volume or routes, per se - their view is that
they're selling privileged engagement with large numbers of
potentially monetizable individual prospects.
In a world ruled by by the dreaded principles of completion, that would
be described as the price where buyer and seller agreed on the value of
the product.
Note that I'm neither endorsing nor disputing this perspective, just
mooting it as a possible explanation.|
I do endorse a free market as providing the best value to all.
Are there any real-world models out there for revenue-sharing between
app/content providers and access networks which would eliminate or
reduce 'paid peering' (an alternate way to think of it is as
'delimited transit', another oxymoron like 'paid peering', but with a
slightly different emphasis) monetary exchanges?
Maybe it is time to try a free market.
--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to
learn from their mistakes.
(Adapted from Stephen Pinker)
