[LINK] How to save the Planet with P2P

[stephen at melbpc.org.au]

Tom blogs,

> Think of the savings in greenhouse gases of not having to send an
> email around the world.. P2P should be .. legislated as mandatory.
>
> http://www.perceptric.com/blog/_archives/2009/3/17/4124619.html


"Increased peering favoured"  1 January 2000 12:00AM

http://www.itnews.com.au/News/11683,increased-peering-favoured.aspx

Eleven out of 20 submissions so far received in the newest Australian 
Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) inquiry into Internet peering 
favour a government ruling increasing access to the network for all ISPs. 

The ACCC earlier this year announced a public inquiry into the peering 
interconnection arrangements between Australian ISPs, producing a 
discussion paper and requesting submissions.

Just seven of the 20 submissions received by the initial June deadline 
were emphatically against a change to more multi-faceted peering, while 
the remaining two offered a qualified “maybe”. 

One ISP that made an ACCC submission, Pacific Internet, has repeatedly 
pressed for government action on peering, which it sees as being unfairly 
monopolised by what it names 'the gang of four' companies--Telstra, 
Optus, MCI Worldcom/Ozemail and AAPT/Connect.com.au. 

Those four firms do not charge each other to exchange Internet data, 
according to Pacific Internet. Other ISPs are charged for data their 
customers exchange with those four companies, who were forced to co-
operate by the ACCC in 1998. Pacific Internet, along with other companies 
supporting a widening of the peering arrangements, argue that the current 
arrangement keeps the cost of data artificially high. 

Iain McKimm, director of technology and strategy at Pacific Internet 
Australia, wrote the Pacific Internet-Netspace submission with Netspace's 
Stuart Marburg. “You can have the ironic situation of being based in 
Brisbane and paying about three times as much for that data as you would 
getting it in New York,” McKimm said. “Look at other countries with 
peering agreements...[some] have a large take-up of broadband services, 
such as in Korea and Sweden.” 

McKimm said that the network monopoly held by the 'gang of four' was 
hindering competition, and thus Australian ISPs' ability to supply top-
notch products and services to customers. 

Phil Tsakaros, national technology manager for Pacific Internet 
Australia, said it was usually cheaper to source all domestic web-based 
content via the US. “In most cases the cost differential is at least 50 
percent to as high as 75 percent,” Tsakaros said. 

“It is cheaper to access Australian content by sending it via the US, 
across the Pacific, over and back. I smell a rat.” 

He said he found it difficult to believe anyone would think the 'gang of 
four' arrangements did not have elements of anti-competitiveness..

--

and: www.zdnet.com.au/whitepaper/0,2000063328,22465789p-16001477q,00.htm

TRECON: A Framework for Enforcing Trusted ISP Peering
23-07-2006 Wayne State University

This paper envisions that neglecting economic factors and trustworthiness 
evaluation of ISPs is one of the obstacles to developing Next Generation 
Internet (NGI). 

This paper takes the initial step to build a general framework called 
TRECON, which combines an adaptive Personalized Trust model (aPET) with 
an economic-based approach and provides independent routing among ISPs. 

With TRECON, autonomous organizations (e.g., ISPs) with varied interests 
and optimization criteria are smoothly integrated together to achieve 
better scalability, isolation and self-management. The evaluation results 
show that the TRUst-based strategy (TRU) performs much better than the 
global Shortest Path Routing (SPA) approach in terms of delay, 
reliability and economic incentives. 
--


Cheers people
Stephen Loosley
Victoria, Australia