nanog mailing list archives
Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage
From: Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2008 01:28:51 -0700
Dave Blaine wrote:
There are at least three ways to address this Sprint / Cogent partition: 1. Send Vint Cerf back up to Capitol Hill with a doomsday scenario of what would happen to the economy if anyone else gets as stupid as Sprint has been, begging for laws that any tier-1 or tier-2 who wants to de-peer needs to provide all their customers and peers with 90 day notice or face stiff fines. Send John Schnizlein along with him to get the House Communications Director an Akamai hosting account. Repeat the "eyeballs-or-data, which is more valuable" mantra whether or not there are still forty Republicans in the Senate. 2. Pick up some more fiber, dust off the router manuals, and allow and recommend that tier-1s transit any third party tier-1-to-tier-1 traffic. 3. Both. Which is the best way?
4. Multihome. ~Seth
Current thread:
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage, (continued)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Anders Lindbäck (Nov 02)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Joe Greco (Nov 02)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Anders Lindbäck (Nov 02)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Marshall Eubanks (Nov 02)
- RE: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Frank Bulk (Nov 02)
- RE: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Randy Epstein (Nov 02)
- RE: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Frank Bulk (Nov 02)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Colin Alston (Nov 02)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Colin Alston (Nov 02)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Florian Weimer (Nov 02)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage Eugeniu Patrascu (Nov 05)
- Re: routing around Sprint's depeering damage tvest (Nov 02)