[109160] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Internet partitioning event regulations (was: RE: Sending vs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michal Krsek)
Fri Nov 7 09:18:05 2008
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:17:28 +0100
From: Michal Krsek <michal@krsek.cz>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <3c3e3fca0811051432i21e068eahf9933e59365eb76c@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> First, let me say that I think peering regulation is a terrible idea.
> No matter how cleverly you plan it, the result will be that fewer
> small companies can participate. That's the character of regulation:
> compliance creates more barriers to entry than it removes.
>
> That having been said, jurisdiction is a red herring. Every
> transit-free provider does at least some of its business in the United
> States. Economic reality compels them to continue to do so for the
> foreseeable future. That's all the hook the Feds need.
>
Have you kept in your mind that this may be changed in future? I know,
we are talking in NANOG, but ... Some regions works on Internet
development a bit faster than US and in future, this regulation may
motivate some overseas players to stop peering in US. For example LINX
and AMS-IX are good place to get peering in EU.
Regards
MK
