nanog mailing list archives
RE: Sprint peering policy
From: "Daniel Golding" <dgolding () sockeye com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 13:16:29 -0400
Air Travel: Limited resources (gates), public safety issues, public infrastructure used (ATC system). Commercial Fishing: Limited resources, environmental issues Conventional Telco: Pre-existing monopoly using what was essentially public ifrastructure. Same goes for Cable TV. How do IP networks fall into any of these categories? It's not like we are going to overfish our BGP sessions or crash routers into things. - Daniel Golding
Paul Vixie Said... so, the reason i am puzzled is that while some of those could be argued by some people, they _are_not_being_argued_about_. there's a blind eye here. none of the following industries would be allowed the kind of "self regulation" currently practiced in the IP carriage field: air travel, commercial fishing, leased line telco, or switched voice telco. we're treated in a hands-off fashion that absolutely boggles the mind.
Current thread:
- Re: Sprint peering policy, (continued)
- Re: Sprint peering policy alex (Jul 01)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Deepak Jain (Jul 01)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Phil Rosenthal (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Paul Vixie (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Nigel Titley (Jul 02)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Deepak Jain (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy David Lesher (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard Irving (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy alex (Jul 02)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Phil Rosenthal (Jul 01)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Deepak Jain (Jul 01)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy E.B. Dreger (Jul 01)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Phil Rosenthal (Jul 01)
- Message not available
- RE: Sprint peering policy Grant A. Kirkwood (Jul 01)