nanog mailing list archives
Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts
From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon () cox net>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:45:20 -0600
Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
From a technical standpoint, the Internet is always suffering from multiple political failures. This leaves it vulnerable to small technical failures itcould otherwise route around.See above. I do not think it is a "political failure" that I do not give you free transit.
We3 have, I think, a reality failure. The terminology comes from ARP and UUCP days.The reality comes from today, where traffic flows, as a maximum, between nodes that think there is something it for them to allow it to flow.
If a packet has evidence of "fare paid" flows. End of story.The difference between "peer" and "transit is the coin used to pay the fare.
Current thread:
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts, (continued)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Patrick W. Gilmore (Nov 04)
- RE: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts michael.dillon (Nov 04)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Paul Vixie (Nov 05)
- RE: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts michael.dillon (Nov 05)
- RE: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Church, Charles (Nov 05)
- RE: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts david raistrick (Nov 05)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Kraig Beahn (Nov 06)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Lamar Owen (Nov 04)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Niels Bakker (Nov 04)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 04)
- Re: Sprint v. Cogent, some clarity & facts Larry Sheldon (Nov 04)