nanog mailing list archives
RE: net-neutrality
From: Nathan Eisenberg <nathan () atlasnetworks us>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 16:27:43 +0000
Hi, considering the fact that several organisations have been severely undermining net-neutrality over the past few months, which they seem to see as less important than their copyright bullshit, we have decided to set an example: Should the following networks, to which list more will be added over the coming month, desire to exchange traffic with AS34109, they can obtain a traffic relay contract at sales () cb3rob net, the costs of which amount to 10000 euros per month, excl. 19% VAT, if not, well, then it's simply no more internets for them... sorry peeps.
Just so I understand correctly, you're implementing what is tantamount to a 'violation of net neutrality' in order to punish these organizations for attempting to protect their intellectual property? You seem to value the neutral natural state of the internet at large. If you're upset by the way these businesses have conducted themselves, find a response which doesn't violate your own ethics. Otherwise, you look like a hypocrite throwing a tantrum. Best Regards, Nathan Eisenberg
Current thread:
- Re: net-neutrality, (continued)
- Re: net-neutrality Sven Olaf Kamphuis (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Suresh Ramasubramanian (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Sven Olaf Kamphuis (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Suresh Ramasubramanian (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Sven Olaf Kamphuis (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Sven Olaf Kamphuis (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Raymond Dijkxhoorn (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Suresh Ramasubramanian (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Sven Olaf Kamphuis (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality William Pitcock (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality Chris Fuenty (Aug 11)
- Re: RE: net-neutrality Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 11)
- Re: net-neutrality JC Dill (Aug 12)