[49414] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Sprint peering policy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Golding)
Mon Jul 1 13:22:00 2002
From: "Daniel Golding" <dgolding@sockeye.com>
To: "Paul Vixie" <paul@vix.com>, <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 13:16:29 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20020629153016.2EB9B28DDE@as.vix.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Air Travel: Limited resources (gates), public safety issues, public
infrastructure used (ATC system).
Commercial Fishing: Limited resources, environmental issues
Conventional Telco: Pre-existing monopoly using what was essentially public
ifrastructure. Same goes for Cable TV.
How do IP networks fall into any of these categories? It's not like we are
going to overfish our BGP sessions or crash routers into things.
- Daniel Golding
> Paul Vixie Said...
> so, the reason i am puzzled is that while some of those could be argued by
> some people, they _are_not_being_argued_about_. there's a blind eye here.
>
> none of the following industries would be allowed the kind of
> "self regulation"
> currently practiced in the IP carriage field: air travel,
> commercial fishing,
> leased line telco, or switched voice telco. we're treated in a hands-off
> fashion that absolutely boggles the mind.
>
