[49182] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: How low can Worldcom stock go?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vivien M.)
Wed Jun 26 11:31:47 2002
From: "Vivien M." <vivienm@dyndns.org>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 11:29:05 -0400
In-Reply-To: <3D19D650.BF67C2DB@onecall.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On
> Behalf Of Richard Irving
> Sent: June 26, 2002 10:57 AM
> To: Marc Pierrat
> Cc: deepak@ai.net; blitz; ekgermann@cctec.com; nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: How low can Worldcom stock go?
>
> With the recent rash of chapter 11's and 13's perhaps we should
> be re-examining the peering practices in America...
That's already being done. Of course, not in the way you seem to
suggest... Instead, you have increased depeering as everyone tries to
squeeze [non-existant] money out of everybody else.
Don't get me started on what C&W did to the Exodus backbone. It used to
be that from our servers to my cable modem at home, it was Exodus ->
Teleglobe -> Rogers. Now, after a massive round of depeering, it's
Exodus -> C&W -> Sprint -> Teleglobe -> Rogers. It's like that with
pretty much everything: you used to have some networks who peered
directly with Exodus, now traffic to them goes through C&W and UUnet
first, etc.
Vivien
--
Vivien M.
vivienm@dyndns.org
Assistant System Administrator
Dynamic DNS Network Services
http://www.dyndns.org/
