nanog mailing list archives
Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 04:36:59 -1000
if i am a paying sbc or other foopoloy voice customer, and i place a voice call to aunt tillie, does aunt tillie pay sbc to hold up her end of the conversation? if i am a paying sbc or other foopoloy dsl customer and i go to <http://content.provider>, why should content.provider pay to give the sbc paying customer what they're already charged for? what these greedy <bleep>s want it a way to double bill. your analogy to the riaa/mpa desperation is apt. randy
Current thread:
- Re: Equal access to content, (continued)
- Re: Equal access to content Randy Bush (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Christopher L. Morrow (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Blaine Christian (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Doug Barton (Nov 02)
- Re: Equal access to content Andy Davidson (Nov 03)
- Re: Equal access to content Christian Kuhtz (Nov 03)
- Re: Equal access to content Mike Leber (Nov 03)
- Re: Equal access to content Mike Leber (Nov 03)
- Re: Equal access to content Randy Bush (Nov 03)
- Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions Randy Bush (Nov 02)
- Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions Christian Kuhtz (Nov 02)
- Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions David Barak (Nov 02)
- Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions Deepak Jain (Nov 02)
- RE: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions Wayne Gustavus (nanog) (Nov 03)
- Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions Christian Kuhtz (Nov 02)