|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: Sprint peering policy
I would venture to say that to WorldCom, all traffic is destined to a peer, or a customer, and they NEVER pay for traffic. Peering with them is entirely a courtesy from them to you, as they can always see you through their current peers. The fact that they failed, having had such extensive peering, proves that peering has no relation to financial difficulties (in my mind, at least) --Phil -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Golding Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 1:27 PM To: Richard Irving Cc: Paul Vixie; [email protected] Subject: RE: Sprint peering policy What is the connection between unregulated peering and the financial difficulties we have seen? The problems have been caused by: - Bad business models - Greed - Corporate officers who have shirked their fudiciary responsibilities to the stockholders If you can somehow tie peering into this, please be my guest, but it would be a bit of a stretch. - Daniel Golding > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of > Richard Irving > Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 1:15 PM > To: Daniel Golding > Cc: Paul Vixie; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Sprint peering policy > > > > Daniel Golding wrote: > > > > A vague sense of unfairness or unhappyness is the worst of reasons > > to regulate an industry. > > > > - Daniel Golding > > How about an industry being the origin of the 3 largest recorded > fraud/bankruptcies in American History ? >
|