Ma et al. — and a number of others too — have been looking inefficiencies in current peering and transit models (especially ISPs using self-interested routing mechanisms such as using the hot-potato algorithm, because the cost of doing so do not result in profit, though it benefits the system as a whole). Ma et al. "Internet Economics: The Use of Shapley Value for ISP Settlement" http://goo.gl/vj1Yd Ma et al. "On cooperative settlement between content, transit, and eyeball internet service providers" http://goo.gl/Xbdx8 Cheung et al. "Can bilateral ISP peering lead to network-wide cooperative settlement" http://goo.gl/falKq Mycek et al. "Cooperative multi-provider routing optimization and income distribution" http://goo.gl/goGKb Carlton Samuels [2012-10-24 23:18]:
....peering agreements are instituted on a handshake.
This should be of interest in areas of the world where the challenge to Internet for the many is access...and the [direct and indirect] costs of access.
It makes the case for IXPs and their widespread proliferation. This is not to say there aren't increasingly contentious challenges on the horizon...
http://oecdinsights.org/2012/10/22/internet-traffic-exchange-2-billion-users...
- Carlton
============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Pranesh Prakash Policy Director Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: @pranesh_prakash