On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 06:46, Scott Howard
Sprints side of the story - https://www.sprint.net/cogent.php
"Cogent sought a peering trial agreement in the hopes that it would lead to settlement-free peering status with Sprint. Settlement-free peering is a contractual relationship in which two companies exchange Internet traffic without charging each other. This arrangement is only fair if the two parties exchange roughly equal volumes of traffic across the two networks." Still pushing this intuitively credible nonsense. There isn't a single byte exchanged that wasn't either sent or requested by a customer. The asymmetry is a customer artifact (which Cogent can hardly be expected to remedy, except with, oh, of course, money) and Sprint should charge their customers appropriately, not attempt to extort fees from Cogent. It would be good to look forward to a future without the long, long shadow of "only sender pays" postal settlements justifying simple greed and obfuscating the exploitation of market power to reduce competition. For that is all de-peering is.
Scott
Hamish. -- http://tr.im/HKM