[133854] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "potential new and different architectural approach" to solve
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Temkin)
Sat Dec 18 18:05:40 2010
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2010 18:05:28 -0500
From: Dave Temkin <davet1@gmail.com>
To: Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net>
In-Reply-To: <20101218062843.GA38726@gerbil.cluepon.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
>
> BTW, they rejected my very nice comment on their blog asking if they
> would be willing to share the graphs of their transit provider
> interfaces (which are NOT peering relationships, and not under NDA) to
> back up their claims that the published graphs are false, so I'm
> positive yours isn't going to get through. :)
>
>
Seems as though, in both this case and Steve's case, Comcast is going
out of their way to spin as much FUD as they can against those who dare
speak out and are making a concerted effort to censor their "blog" (ie,
press release machine).
It's not going unnoticed and I hope they realize that instead of
commenting on their blog, "we" will turn to the official FCC comment
process.
-Dave
