So far from what I have gathered, everyone is afraid of being used as a
transit point. There is a very simple solution available which I can't
figure out why people are not using.
Both peers charge each other for the bits being peered. So now if one
peer is being used as a transit point, then they get compensated for it.
15443621 bits -> 15443621 bits
20000000 bits <- 20000000 bits
This is not simple or correct. For example, we host MicroSoft's download site
for Internet Explorer. Should we pay the price for all the bits we deliver
to AAA in response to AAA's customers requests for Internet Explorer? I don't
Difference 4556379 bits additional sent from BBB to AAA
Applying lets say 1 cent per 100 bit charge, AAA gets $455.64 from BBB
Now with this kind of peering arrangement, no one has to be worried about
being used as a transit point -- infact they will want to be used as a
Why heck, it would even make the $5/month personal accounts proffitable,
as you would get reimbursed by all the ISP's your customers download from.
This will also allow medium sized ISPs to peer with each-other.
So here is my question -- why is this kind of arrangement not being used
Because it's a broken idea.