nanog mailing list archives
Re: Sprint peering policy
From: alex () yuriev com
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 13:05:12 -0400 (EDT)
i completely understand that acquisition is a common and valid means to grow a business. however, with closed peering as a way of life for our industry, a lot of deals are done which only make money for the investment bankers and don't actually "grow business". closed peering is all about greed and not about service levels, competitive pricing, or overall sector health.
The reason we have this industry alive is investment bankers. Had we not had it, there would not have been abundance of fiber, abundance of competition and easy accessibility of IP. Like it or not, without these games we would have still though of a T1 as of a huge pipe. Alex
Current thread:
- Re: Sprint peering policy, (continued)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy alex (Jul 02)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard Irving (Jul 02)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 02)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Phil Rosenthal (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Clayton Fiske (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard A Steenbergen (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 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)