[28019] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ehud Gavron)
Tue Apr 4 21:45:58 2000
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 18:43:10 -0700 (MST)
From: Ehud Gavron <GAVRON@ACES.COM>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Tue, 04 Apr 2000 14:27:51 -0400"
<200004041827.e34IRpL06934@sss1.gwi.net>
To: Fletcher E Kittredge <fkittred@sss1.gwi.net>
Cc: Paul Ferguson <ferguson@cisco.com>,
Gordon Cook <cook@cookreport.com>, nanog@merit.edu, GAVRON@ACES.COM
Message-id: <01JNUJIQMMNA92FG9F@ACES.COM>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
This argument is specious. Gordon isn't press. Well, garlic press
maybe.
Ehud
p.s. "press credentials" are not hard to fake, but ask Gordon for his
>On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 21:47:50 -0400 Paul Ferguson wrote:
>>
>> >surprised not to see this mentioned on NANOG
>> >
>> > >Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000
>> > >To: Notify
>> > >Subject: Exodus Customer Confidential Communication
>> > >
>>
>> Gordon,
>>
>> Does the word "confidential" elude you?
>>
>> - paul
>Golly Paul, I would not have guessed you would have taken this
>position.
>If a tobacco company marks a collusion document "CONFIDENTIAL", should
>the press not report it?
>If a Waco report is market "Top Secret", should the press not report
>it?
>If Boeing has a flawed design, should the press not report it?
>There is a fair amount of evidence that an unruly and discourteous
>press is a profound good for society....
>regards,
>fletcher
>P.S. "Scandal-Monger", Safire, William, 2000
