nanog mailing list archives
Re: Sprint peering policy
From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan () fugawi net>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2002 23:19:11 -0400
At 04:33 PM 7/1/2002 -0700, Randy Bush wrote:
> There is no way for a company to price transit below their peering > costs and make money. this may be true, but it's the level(3) business model. and the rest of the industry got suckered into dropping their drawers to match. kinda like a bunch of old men drinking poison to see who dies first.
Didn't Level(3) do it based on the early model of if they build it they will come?
Are they still doing it? If they are, maybe it's a good sign to look at. They're still here. Regards, -- Martin Hannigan hannigan () fugawi net
Current thread:
- RE: Sprint peering policy, (continued)
- Message not available
- RE: Sprint peering policy Grant A. Kirkwood (Jul 01)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Giles Heron (Jul 02)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 02)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Phil Rosenthal (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy dre (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Leo Bicknell (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Robert A. Hayden (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Randy Bush (Jul 01)
- Message not available
- Re: Sprint peering policy Randy Bush (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Martin Hannigan (Jul 01)
- Re: True cost of peering (was Re: Sprint peering policy) Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 01)
- Re: True cost of peering (was Re: Sprint peering policy) Ralph Doncaster (Jul 02)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard A Steenbergen (Jul 01)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Gordon Cook (Jul 02)