Message to Paul but posted to NANOG. Therefore, my comments:
(1) CIX is an association of ISPs. The CIX Inter-exchange puts
CIX in direct competition with its members (ISPs) for
customers. Is there a contradiction here?
Yes & No. A CIX member is not forced to have a circuit at CIX.
There are members who are not ISPs. Perhaps the mutual benefits
of the association out weigh any individual negative aspects of
working together as a group.
(2) The CIX Inter-exchange has been used by some to bypass
peering policies. I am wondering if the CIX Inter-exchange
remains a viable option in the peering policy review.
You pose this question as if the CIX is a problem for the Internet
peering policy situation? If anything, the CIX peering policy remains
a clear, unambiguous, statement working for the good of its members
and for the good of the Internet. As long as the membership gives
this kind of direction to the current CIX leadership (Bob, Barbara,
et.al.) then Paul is doing his job right by making the best technical
moves with the resources available. (Which sounds like a lot of us,eh?)
(3) Today there are quite a few inter-exchanges in the Bay Area
that are superior (in terms of tech. and richness in connectivity)
than the CIX Interexchange. Is it fair to say that the
CIX Inter-exchange has fulfilled its historical mission and
is no longer needed?
I suppose that is a question for the membership. However, they
appear to support the recent technical upgrade to the IX as well
as supporting the legaslative and other promotional activities
of the CIX.
Mike Trest, ATMNET Voice: 619 643-1805
5440 Morehouse Drive Fax: 619 643-1801
San Diego, CA USA 92121 EMAIL: trest@ATMnet.net