IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cam/camdae/0621.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

‘Unfair’ Discrimination in Two-sided Peering? Evidence from LINX

Author

Listed:
  • D’Ignazio, A.
  • Giovannetti, E.

Abstract

Does asymmetry between Internet Providers affect the “fairness” of their interconnection contracts? While recent game theoretic literature provides contrasting answers to this question, there is a lack of empirical research. We introduce a novel dataset on micro-interconnection policies and provide an econometric analysis of the determinants of peering decisions amongst the Internet Service Providers interconnecting at the London Internet Exchange Point (LINX). Our key result shows that two different metrics, introduced to capture asymmetry, exert opposite effects. Asymmetry in “market size” enhances the quality of the link, while asymmetry in “network centrality” induces quality degradation, hence “unfairer” interconnection conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • D’Ignazio, A. & Giovannetti, E., 2006. "‘Unfair’ Discrimination in Two-sided Peering? Evidence from LINX," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0621, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
  • Handle: RePEc:cam:camdae:0621
    Note: IO
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/research-files/repec/cam/pdf/cwpe0621.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cremer, Jacques & Rey, Patrick & Tirole, Jean, 2000. "Connectivity in the Commercial Internet," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 433-472, December.
    2. Narine Badasyan & Subhadip Chakrabarti, 2003. "Private Peering Among Internet Backbone Providers," Industrial Organization 0301002, EconWPA, revised 20 Jan 2003.
    3. Takanori Ida, 2005. "Analysis of Internet topology with a three-level components model," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(8), pages 527-534.
    4. Pio Baake & Thorsten Wichmann, 1999. "On the economics of Internet peering," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 89-105, October.
    5. Foros, Oystein & Kind, Hans Jarle & Sorgard, Lars, 2002. "Access Pricing, Quality Degradation, and Foreclosure in the Internet," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 59-83, July.
    6. Foros, Oystein & Hansen, Bjorn, 2001. "Competition and compatibility among Internet Service Providers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 411-425, December.
    7. Martin B. Weiss & Seung Jae Shin, 2004. "Internet Interconnection Economic Model and its Analysis: Peering and Settlement," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 43-57, April.
    8. Jackson, Matthew O. & Wolinsky, Asher, 1996. "A Strategic Model of Social and Economic Networks," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 44-74, October.
    9. Giovannetti, Emanuele, 2002. "Interconnection, differentiation and bottlenecks in the Internet," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 385-404, September.
    10. Mason, R., 1999. "Compatibility between differentiated networks," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 9909, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    11. Venkatesh Bala & Sanjeev Goyal, 2000. "A Noncooperative Model of Network Formation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1181-1230, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Internet Peering; Two-sided Markets; Network Industries; Antitrust;

    JEL classification:

    • L14 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Transactional Relationships; Contracts and Reputation
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • L96 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Telecommunications
    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cam:camdae:0621. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jake Dyer). General contact details of provider: http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/ .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.