Re: InterCage, Inc. (NOT Atrivo)

* Patrick W. Gilmore · * Thu Sep 11 18:58:51 2008

On Sep 11, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
In the internet world, mass depeering / de-transitting like we've
see in this instance is akin to capital punishment.  By vigilantes.
The US Old West redux.

Connecting to my network is a PRIVILEGE, not a right.  You lose a
criminal case, you lose rights (e.g. freedom to walk outside).
Disconnecting you from my network is not denying any of your rights.
There is no law or even custom stopping me from asking you to prove
you are worthy to connect to my network.  You don't want to prove it,
that's your right, just as it is my right to not connect to you.
Mind if I ask why you think you have any right to connect to my
network if I do not want you to do so?  For _any_ reason, including
not showing me "legit" customers, political affiliation, or even the
color of your hat?

amidst all this high flyin' political theory discussion of rights,
there

is an elephant in the room. as conditions to merger/purchase, there

were legal restrictions placed on one or more significant operators

regarding [de-]peering (i.e. your statement above is significantly

incorrect). my altzheimer's device tells me that those restrictions
end

2008.12.31. expect change.

The fact there is a temporary exception to the rule for two providers
in the US who agreed to the exception for reasons other than peering /
transit does not mean the rule is invalid.
As for (some of?) the exceptions expiring at the end of this calendar
year, I'm not at all certain it will be a sea change. Contrary to
popular belief, the US is not the center of the Internet any more.
And even if it were, those providers - even the two combined - are not
the center of the US Internet. Besides, wouldn't that just prove the
rule anyway? :)
The 'Net has become much more egalitarian. I would think that you of
all people Randy would applaud the internationalization and flattening
of the Internet.
--
TTFN,
patrick