nanog mailing list archives
Re: Sprint peering policy
From: Vijay Gill <vgill () vijaygill com>
Date: 28 Jun 2002 17:28:29 +0000
"Daniel Golding" <dgolding () sockeye com> writes:
One is, Sprint won't peer with you. I'm not even sure who you work for, but rest assured, they will not peer with you. Time spent on this might be better utilized reading some of Bill Norton's excellent intro to peering
Dan, if you are a peer of sprint and I use the word peer as in: 1 : one that is of equal standing with another : EQUAL; especially : one belonging to the same societal group especially based on age, grade, or status then I am sure things can happen. Keeping the above definition of peering in mind, and not the current accepted definition of what "peering" means, things suddenly become crystal clear. vijay "time to put back the peer in peering" gill
Current thread:
- RE: Sprint peering policy, (continued)
- RE: Sprint peering policy E.B. Dreger (Jun 27)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Alex Rubenstein (Jun 27)
- RE: Sprint peering policy E.B. Dreger (Jun 27)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Joe Wood (Jun 27)
- Message not available
- RE: Sprint peering policy Patrick W. Gilmore (Jun 27)
- RE: Sprint peering policy Ralph Doncaster (Jun 27)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard A Steenbergen (Jun 27)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Patrick W. Gilmore (Jun 27)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Joseph T. Klein (Jun 27)
- Re: Sprint peering policy E.B. Dreger (Jun 27)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Vijay Gill (Jun 28)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Mike Leber (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Vijay Gill (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Paul Vixie (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Pat Myrto (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy william (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard A Steenbergen (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy E.B. Dreger (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Stephen J. Wilcox (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Richard A Steenbergen (Jun 29)
- Re: Sprint peering policy Scott Weeks (Jun 29)