Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!bbn.com!wbe
From: wbe@bbn.com (Winston B Edmond)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: another thought on packet charging
Message-ID: <23737@bbn.COM>
Date: 21 Apr 88 20:41:02 GMT
References: <8804210408.AA16030@bu-cs.bu.edu>
Sender: news@bbn.COM
Reply-To: wbe@BBN.COM (Winston B Edmond)
Organization: BBN Laboratories Incorporated, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 15

Barry Shein writes:
>Does anyone have a proposed set of rules that are better than these?
>
>[SECOND HALF]
>
>About the only thing that comes to my mind is a meta-protocol (ICMP?)
>sort of like a WILL YOU/WONT YOU:

This (transfer of charges on request) is essentially what I proposed in my
previous message.  The main difference is that I claim the protocol should be
between the hosts and the network (the entity collecting the billing
information) and not between the hosts directly.  What's important to the
host trying to reverse the charges is that the network says billing has been
transferred, not that the other host has made a promise to accept the bill.
-WBE