nanog mailing list archives
Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon () eiv com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 10:20:22 -0500
On Tue, Nov 21, 2000 at 02:12:38PM -0800, Roeland Meyer wrote:
engineers doing this when it could have been prevented? I have. Three contractors, doing this, in over-time, at Silicon-Valley rates is well over $20K. More than enough to make it worth my while to sue my upstream.
And did you sue, or did you request the filter be removed? You stated earlier in this thread that what you would do, and what anyone reasonable would do, is immediately call their lawyer. Did you call him first, or did you contact the upstream first?
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- Re: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end....", (continued)
- Re: "...the IPv4 TOS field should be end-to-end...." Joe Abley (Nov 21)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Jason Slagle (Nov 21)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Stephen Sprunk (Nov 21)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Hank Nussbacher (Nov 20)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police JIM FLEMING (Nov 20)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Joe Abley (Nov 21)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police JIM FLEMING (Nov 20)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 21)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Mike Johnson (Nov 21)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Jason Slagle (Nov 21)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 21)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Shawn McMahon (Nov 22)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Roeland Meyer (Nov 22)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Dan Hollis (Nov 22)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Shawn McMahon (Nov 22)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Mathew Butler (Nov 22)
- Re: ISPs as content-police or method-police Steve Sobol (Nov 22)
- RE: ISPs as content-police or method-police Mathew Butler (Nov 27)