On Dec 18, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
"Richard" == Richard L Barnes <rbarnes(_at_)bbn(_dot_)com> writes:
Richard> Here's (what the ITU claims is) the specific proposal that
Richard> has been made to the ITU: " An ITU spokesman said: "The
ITU
Richard> has no plans to modify the BGP protocol, which is not an
Richard> ITU-T standard. "A proposal has been made, and is being
Richard> studied, to use BGP routers to collect traffic flow data,
Richard> which could be used, by bilateral agreement, by operators
Richard> for billing purposes."
Richard> "
Richard> Is this disingenuous or has the ITU really not heard of
Richard> netflow?
What's so bogus about wanting to charge for traffic?
Where I would raise a flag is, charge whom ?
This sounds very much like the way that international long distance
used to be done. That the Internet does not support that is to me, at
least, not a bug but a very desirable feature.
Marshall
I mean you might
not want to have your traffic go somewhere where it's going to be
expensive, but governments have been charging for and taxing things
for
a long time.
If the technical details of how to accomplish this are bogus (and
changing BGP to include flow data would be), then perhaps that
should be
fixed. However judging something on all the things a spokesperson
says
it is *not* seems counter productive.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf