Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Cable & Wireless "de-peering"?!?
From: owen () dixon delong sj ca us (Owen DeLong)
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 10:35:46 -0700

A similar tactic was also used by PSI about 9 months ago.  The evalutaion
of the success of their maneuver is left as an exercise for the reader and
the bankruptcy court judges.


On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 09:37:10AM -0700, Paul Vixie wrote:

albert () waller net (Albert Meyer) writes:

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. ...

I am completely fascinated by your assessment (that UUNet didn't pull it off).

It is rare, but I agree with Paul here :)

 Unet is, for example, one of the few (if not the only) ISP in The
Netherlands that charges for *peering* (no, not transit, just peering).

More and more clued people I know are avoiding UUnet because they
don't peer with the small but quickly growing ISPs. Most UUnet
customers are getting worse and worse connectivity as other ISPs stop
peering with UUnet, because UUnet is becoming less and less important.
A nice downward spiral.

Greetz, Peter.

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]