Mailing List Archive: NANOG: users

Simple Peering Agreement

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

lists at mtin

Jun 15, 2012, 10:24 AM

Post #1 of 9 (442 views)
Permalink

Simple Peering Agreement

Does anyone have a simple (1-2 page) peering agreement in plain English they
would care to share offlist?

Thanks,
Justin

--
Justin Wilson <j2sw [at] mtin>
Aol & Yahoo IM: j2sw
http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News
http://www.twitter.com/j2sw Follow me on Twitter

isabeldias1 at yahoo

Jun 15, 2012, 10:36 AM

Post #2 of 9 (425 views)
Permalink

Re: Simple Peering Agreement [In reply to]

are you any good in Maths?

http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routing%20Technologies%20and%20Internet%20Peering%20Agr.%202001.pdf

maybe a PhD will find a point in using this part of their self-development

how far can you go and what is your position in the world?

I guess linking countries is easy if you are offer the position but you can't move from there can you? so the revenue in peering agreements not free peering but private peering is maybe what they look fw to achieve.

i guess a new model might be under research as this one is an old IPv4 one and IPv6 peering agreements are in production ......maybe with internet 2 too.......

--- On Fri, 6/15/12, Justin Wilson <lists [at] mtin> wrote:

From: Justin Wilson <lists [at] mtin>
Subject: Simple Peering Agreement
To: "NANOG (nanog [at] nanog)" <nanog [at] nanog>
Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 7:24 PM

Does anyone have a simple (1-2 page) peering agreement in plain English they
would care to share offlist?

Thanks,
Justin

--
Justin Wilson <j2sw [at] mtin>
Aol & Yahoo IM: j2sw
http://www.mtin.net/blog xISP News
http://www.twitter.com/j2sw Follow me on Twitter

nick at foobar

Jun 15, 2012, 10:37 AM

Post #3 of 9 (430 views)
Permalink

Re: Simple Peering Agreement [In reply to]

On 15/06/2012 18:24, Justin Wilson wrote:
> Does anyone have a simple (1-2 page) peering agreement in plain English they
> would care to share offlist?

http://www.google.com/search?q=peering%20agreement%20%2Bfiletype%3Adoc

Nick

garrett at skjelstad

Jun 15, 2012, 10:39 AM

Post #4 of 9 (430 views)
Permalink

Re: Simple Peering Agreement [In reply to]

Also: s/doc/PDF/g

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:37, Nick Hilliard <nick [at] foobar> wrote:

> On 15/06/2012 18:24, Justin Wilson wrote:
>> Does anyone have a simple (1-2 page) peering agreement in plain English they
>> would care to share offlist?
>
> http://www.google.com/search?q=peering%20agreement%20%2Bfiletype%3Adoc
>
> Nick
>

woody at pch

Jun 15, 2012, 10:57 AM

Post #5 of 9 (422 views)
Permalink

Re: Simple Peering Agreement [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Isabel Dias wrote:
> are you any good in Maths?
> http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routing%20Technologies%20and%20Internet%20Peering%20Agr.%202001.pdf

If you're good in maths, you'll realize that the simple peering agreement is the one that covers 99.5% of interconnections, and is well enough understood that it need not be committed to paper. :-)

http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011.pdf

-Bill

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
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=lm/u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

lists at mtin

Jun 15, 2012, 11:10 AM

Post #6 of 9 (425 views)
Permalink

Re: Simple Peering Agreement [In reply to]

I need paperwork to justify several things the bean counters want to see
on paper. It's hard to present why you need 5 additional 10Gig ports when
you have nothing on paper of why those ports are being used.

Justin

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Woodcock <woody [at] pch>
Date: Friday, June 15, 2012 1:57 PM
To: "NANOG (nanog [at] nanog)" <nanog [at] nanog>
Subject: Re: Simple Peering Agreement

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA256
>
>
>On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Isabel Dias wrote:
>> are you any good in Maths?
>>
>>http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routin
>>g%20Technologies%20and%20Internet%20Peering%20Agr.%202001.pdf
>
>If you're good in maths, you'll realize that the simple peering agreement
>is the one that covers 99.5% of interconnections, and is well enough
>understood that it need not be committed to paper. :-)
>
>http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011
>.pdf
>
> -Bill
>
>
>
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
>Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
>
>iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJP23eFAAoJEG+kcEsoi3+HSJ8P+wTeik0+xr1o5R8hTVsCKsrI
>+xwxAOzE5yjt8MXqAKqOWCFqWBWy1xaXcetUiKW/0SKjK+5Uz2OVUsPHnDc6xX/k
>clhM5b2rsB7T5NkRzBO26kfCMXEAL1v9peafxzc3XWjXuOtbf6UnBwH6+OIgiLrM
>+1Sbj/fVI/CwFYhpRRPW77itttfS6srka5uz06vB0XN69VQ7mn/bESOChaypf31K
>Vn3MZhn6byCVDcyrEOH5QtK5DAW1EQrZLbZA9e6VwrrartSjiwP9N9QuVGZ0fXhr
>uKnlQwxJXX1z/hC1REQcYLN4yuRcEFvKJj1t/3yuOoA00TvWZyYiKtzdTnUNmK5c
>BFPImwyod/X0qZHTfzik+dIHbO5vlS31jL/I4xmKn5PYKjNXSODx4viN+C39Je+r
>IR07ppVUv8du4cwDzxDVldFuT8HGv3X3fS5NI1iJUiJFqD5fR/6y1E4EOhGZkVa3
>DI1WwEcSS/mJiW0BgHhuWmHAK++mXANP8qKWZcVNmP7BDwJ8hUKg4tltepVkyvUp
>VyPc4vOns/06TvEM3F8i2nCuCxDxhftsvHnGepYijvSPko25NDCOE5g2VBlITCf2
>neGZ8xttsnTiAqGG5oHYsMWyMg1kjodGHMR2oBzPeNUTUMyOJFM2Ro8TfDvX9b1/
>43LgwdG9N3ExiUpAmKcO
>=lm/u
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

valdis.kletnieks at vt

Jun 15, 2012, 11:17 AM

Post #7 of 9 (427 views)
Permalink

Re: Simple Peering Agreement [In reply to]

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:10:14 -0400, Justin Wilson said:
> I need paperwork to justify several things the bean counters want to see
> on paper. It's hard to present why you need 5 additional 10Gig ports when
> you have nothing on paper of why those ports are being used.

If you can't already enumerate the use of those 5 ports, a piece of paper isn't
going to help fix the real problem.

isabeldias1 at yahoo

Jun 15, 2012, 11:53 AM

Post #8 of 9 (426 views)
Permalink

Re: Simple Peering Agreement [In reply to]

http://www.as9009.net/policy/

--- On Fri, 6/15/12, Justin Wilson <lists [at] mtin> wrote:

From: Justin Wilson <lists [at] mtin>
Subject: Re: Simple Peering Agreement
To: "NANOG (nanog [at] nanog)" <nanog [at] nanog>
Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 8:10 PM

I need paperwork to justify several things the bean counters want to see
on paper. It's hard to present why you need 5 additional 10Gig ports when
you have nothing on paper of why those ports are being used.

Justin

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Woodcock <woody [at] pch>
Date: Friday, June 15, 2012 1:57 PM
To: "NANOG (nanog [at] nanog)" <nanog [at] nanog>
Subject: Re: Simple Peering Agreement

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA256
>
>
>On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Isabel Dias wrote:
>> are you any good in Maths?
>>
>>http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routin
>>g%20Technologies%20and%20Internet%20Peering%20Agr.%202001.pdf
>
>If you're good in maths, you'll realize that the simple peering agreement
>is the one that covers 99.5% of interconnections, and is well enough
>understood that it need not be committed to paper. :-)
>
>http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011
>.pdf
>
> -Bill
>
>
>
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
>Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
>
>iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJP23eFAAoJEG+kcEsoi3+HSJ8P+wTeik0+xr1o5R8hTVsCKsrI
>+xwxAOzE5yjt8MXqAKqOWCFqWBWy1xaXcetUiKW/0SKjK+5Uz2OVUsPHnDc6xX/k
>clhM5b2rsB7T5NkRzBO26kfCMXEAL1v9peafxzc3XWjXuOtbf6UnBwH6+OIgiLrM
>+1Sbj/fVI/CwFYhpRRPW77itttfS6srka5uz06vB0XN69VQ7mn/bESOChaypf31K
>Vn3MZhn6byCVDcyrEOH5QtK5DAW1EQrZLbZA9e6VwrrartSjiwP9N9QuVGZ0fXhr
>uKnlQwxJXX1z/hC1REQcYLN4yuRcEFvKJj1t/3yuOoA00TvWZyYiKtzdTnUNmK5c
>BFPImwyod/X0qZHTfzik+dIHbO5vlS31jL/I4xmKn5PYKjNXSODx4viN+C39Je+r
>IR07ppVUv8du4cwDzxDVldFuT8HGv3X3fS5NI1iJUiJFqD5fR/6y1E4EOhGZkVa3
>DI1WwEcSS/mJiW0BgHhuWmHAK++mXANP8qKWZcVNmP7BDwJ8hUKg4tltepVkyvUp
>VyPc4vOns/06TvEM3F8i2nCuCxDxhftsvHnGepYijvSPko25NDCOE5g2VBlITCf2
>neGZ8xttsnTiAqGG5oHYsMWyMg1kjodGHMR2oBzPeNUTUMyOJFM2Ro8TfDvX9b1/
>43LgwdG9N3ExiUpAmKcO
>=lm/u
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

isabeldias1 at yahoo

Jun 15, 2012, 11:55 AM

Post #9 of 9 (428 views)
Permalink

Re: Simple Peering Agreement [In reply to]

http://gogonetlive.com/pdf/gogonet_live2/chris_grundemann.pdf

--- On Fri, 6/15/12, Bill Woodcock <woody [at] pch> wrote:

From: Bill Woodcock <woody [at] pch>
Subject: Re: Simple Peering Agreement
To: "NANOG (nanog [at] nanog)" <nanog [at] nanog>
Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 7:57 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On Jun 15, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Isabel Dias wrote:
> are you any good in Maths?
> http://www.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/Advances%20in%20Routing%20Technologies%20and%20Internet%20Peering%20Agr.%202001.pdf

If you're good in maths, you'll realize that the simple peering agreement is the one that covers 99.5% of interconnections, and is well enough understood that it need not be committed to paper. :-)

http://www.pch.net/resources/papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2011.pdf

-Bill

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
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=lm/u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads