[43084] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The Gorgon's Knot. Was: Re: Verio Peering Question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Fri Sep 28 20:20:23 2001
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 20:32:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
To: Vadim Antonov <avg@exigengroup.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10109281652000.31131-100000@arch.exigengroup.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.40.0109282021260.28293-100000@clifden.donelan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, Vadim Antonov wrote:
> The reason for being very sensitive about routing tables was that ICM part
> of things had quite arcane routing policies; and ability of AS1800
boxes
> to process updates in a timely fashion was quite vital for keeping
> US-Europe Internet connectivity up and running.
Yeah, I know. Sometimes Sprint ICM was part of Sprint, other times it
was that "other" network Sprint just happened to manage.
> Marketing at that time was so clueless about Internet that they couldn't
> even pronounce "routing filter", and definitely couldn't make a marketing
> blitz out of it.
Sprint kept the filters on for years afterwards. It may have taken
the clueless salespeople a few years, but they eventually did figure out
how to recite the magic words "buy your circuit from sprint and you
won't have problems with filters" was a way to win a sale. And who
could forget the popular "Don't buy a circuit from small ISP, because
they won't be able to get past the Internet filters." I went through
a half-dozen Sprint sales people in different parts of the country,
and by 1996 or so they all had the spiel down pat.
I know, I should have taped their sales calls.
