North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Cable & Wireless "de-peering"?!?
Altert: Pardon my ignorance on this issue, but I read C&W's receint peering agreement and it seems they are simply trying to define what is a true "peer". My question is, where is the traditional line that defines who should be a "peer" and who should be a customer and shouldn't that be open to re-evaluation as the network evolves. Is it that C&W has "rigged" their peering agreement with specifics that would de-peer legitimate peers or are they just trying to protect themselves from an evolutinary change. Chuck On Mon, 7 May 2001, Albert Meyer wrote: > > Didn't UUNet try this back in 96? A quick search of Boardwatch failed to > find the article, but ISTR that John Sidgemore eventually slunk back to the > playground and agreed to play nice. If UUNet couldn't pull it off back > then, I doubt that CW can now. Things have changed a lot in 5 years, but I > would suspect that "Stealing the Internet" would now be harder rather than > easier. > > At 01:31 PM 5/6/01 -0500, Joseph T. Klein wrote: > >It seems to be worthy of note that AGIS and PSI tried to use the > >"pay me don't peer" card before they deteriorated. > > --
|