Re: Sprints definition on NAPs (question)

["Justin W. Newton" <justin () erols com>]

At 09:14 AM 5/1/96 -0400, you wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 1996, Jeremy Porter wrote:
>
> > > |} > the Sherman Act (if memory serves).  These types of problems can be
quite
> > > |} > nasty, involving treble punitive damages.
> >
> > Unfortunately for Nathan, this above is wrong.
> >
> > There are very real engineering reasons for not peering
> > if someone is at one NAP/MAE.  Also since Sprint and MCI
> > do have published policies, if they made exceptions to them
> > they could get sued for discriminating against some competators
> > (not all, makes a big legal difference).
>
> Ok, so what about Interpath, CAIS, and a bunch more that are peering with
> MCI and are at only 1 NAP?

Probably because they were peering with MCI before the policy, but thats
just a guess.


Justin Newton                   * You have to change just to stay 
Internet Architect              *      caught up.
Erol's Internet Services        *

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -