nanog mailing list archives
Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering
From: btbowman () comcast net
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 15:33:01 +0000
*Leo Bicknell [bicknell () ufp org] wrote:
If you don't have enable on a router, and you've never negotiated peering with a transit free ISP then you're not qualified to comment. You really don't understand what's going on here, and it's not, I repeat, not a technical problem. There is nothing wrong with the technology, architecture, or anything else. There is something wrong with the business >model of one, or both of these companies.
Well, I disagree. I have no clue. I am not an ISP I do, however, have enable. We do buy transit There are lots of folks that have replied to this thread. A number of them have a lot of "clue". Some, like me, don't. If this list didn't have such lively discussions I would not have the education about how the "Internet" works that this list has given me. If only people with "clue" commented on things this would be a dull place indeed. Might just as well be a closed list. For this, I thank all of you that have contributed.
Current thread:
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution), (continued)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 08)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) Paul Vixie (Oct 09)
- RE: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) David Schwartz (Oct 10)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) William B. Norton (Oct 10)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering (philosophical solution) Paul Vixie (Oct 10)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Joe Abley (Oct 06)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Patrick W. Gilmore (Oct 06)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Jay Adelson (Oct 07)
- Re: Cogent/Level 3 depeering Joe Maimon (Oct 07)