[AusNOG] Domestic Peering WAS: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?

[Luke Iggleden]

On 10/11/12 1:57 AM, Chris Ricks wrote:
> Offensive? I'm not sure you know the meaning of the word!
>
> The issue in Australia is that we see concerns around technology being poorly addressed due to a number of reasons. The arrangement in place should never have occurred, but our governments are typically short sighed.
>
> Similar to changes in DST effect dates, we have governments willing to make statements without the slightest consideration or understanding of the impact and ask on those companies and persons who provide the infrastructure and expertise that supports the society that elects them.
>
> Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm going to commit multiple stupidities here -- responding to this
>> without reading the rest of the thread and being an outsider discussing
>> Australian politics (I'm Canadian). However, in Canada at least I would
>> approach this from a different angle. Could you find the right people
>> either in the civil service3 or in the Prime Minister's Office (if there
>> is such a thing) to have a chat with first?
>>
>> Forgive me if I'm being really offensive.
>>
>> Tom Taylor
>>


It's a long time ago now, but does anyone remember the reason why the 
Go4 peering arrangement was originally set up?

I believe it had something more to do with voice and less to do with data?

 From memory I heard it was due to Telstra having to pay (I assume 
Rumoured) 2c/min for interconnect costs to companies with Voice switches 
like uu.net (vzb), optus(c&w) at the time.

Since people started saying "yes" to other telco's, Telstra had to pay 
per min interconnect costs to C&W & visa versa.

Can anyone from back then confirm for sure how and why this was done? 
Perhaps that would provide insight into getting it reversed and/or 
altered to suit today?