nanog mailing list archives
Re: C&W Peering
From: "Christopher A. Woodfield" <rekoil () semihuman com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 00:49:27 -0400
Could you explain how the PSI/C&W peering fracas has /anything/ to do with Nth percentile billing? -C On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 08:42:01PM -0700, James Thomason wrote:
No, this is the part where I laugh at all of the people who told me this how wonderfully effecient Inter-provider settlement and 95th percentile billing are in the Internet today. Regards, James
-- --------------------------- Christopher A. Woodfield rekoil () semihuman com PGP Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xB887618B
Current thread:
- Re: C&W Peering, (continued)
- Re: C&W Peering Leo Bicknell (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Richard Welty (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Vincent J. Bono (Jun 05)
- Re: C&W Peering Michael Whisenant (Jun 06)
- Re: C&W Peering Rafi Sadowsky (Jun 06)
- Re: C&W Peering Sean Donelan (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Kevin Loch (Jun 04)
- RE: C&W Peering Scott Patterson (Jun 04)
- RE: C&W Peering Matt Levine (Jun 04)
- RE: C&W Peering Scott Patterson (Jun 04)
- RE: C&W Peering James Thomason (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Christopher A. Woodfield (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering (and nTH Percentile Unite!) James Thomason (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W Peering Christopher A. Woodfield (Jun 04)
- Re: C&W peering Toby_Williams (Jun 06)
- Re: C&W peering Stephen J. Wilcox (Jun 09)
- Re: C&W Peering Sean Donelan (Jun 07)