[86345] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: SBC/AT&T + Verizon/MCI Peering Restrictions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christian Kuhtz)
Wed Nov 2 09:31:05 2005
In-Reply-To: <17256.47476.920077.647038@roam.psg.com>
Cc: Daniel Golding <dgolding@burtongroup.com>,
NANOG list <nanog@merit.edu>
From: Christian Kuhtz <kuhtzch@corp.earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 09:30:22 -0500
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
--Apple-Mail-1-163283349
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=US-ASCII;
delsp=yes;
format=flowed
On Nov 2, 2005, at 8:04 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> the two year window is far too low given the sbc ceo's recent public
> statements on the use of his wires by google and the like.
You can pretty much s/the sbc/rboc/g in this context. Leadership
seems to believe that because those who conduct business over 'their'
infrastructure aren't paying them a transaction fee, there's somehow
something wrong with that model. Fact is, they _are_ getting paid
for their pipes, and they've never been part of the transaction model
(aka tax collectors). If you want to be something else, dump the
pipes r us business model. But then you can't have your cake and eat
it, too. Somehow, I'm very reminded of how the music industry has
acted when faced with a disruptor. Very classic threat reponse of
somebody thinking like a mono/duo/whateverpartitionedmarketpoly.
Sections in
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-10-31-
bellsouth-mergers_x.htm have publically confirmed similar thought
patterns. But then again, the CEO's of the companies mentioned here
do look like twins separated at birth, with companies sharing very
similar DNA (even though they all think they're very different).
So, my point being in response to what Randy wrote.. expect a lot
more where that came from, especially as margins come under more
pressure. As long as they pretend disruption can be controlled or
isn't happening, this will continue. And one could argue that the
recently approved mergers might fuel such attitudes.
Best regards,
Christian
--Apple-Mail-1-163283349
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1
<HTML><BODY style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; =
-khtml-line-break: after-white-space; "><BR><DIV><DIV>On Nov 2, 2005, at =
8:04 AM, Randy Bush wrote:</DIV><BR =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type=3D"cite"><DIV =
style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; =
margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><BR></DIV><DIV style=3D"margin-top: =
0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">the two =
year window is far too low given the sbc ceo's recent public</DIV><DIV =
style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; =
margin-left: 0px; ">statements on the use of his wires by google and the =
like.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR =
class=3D"khtml-block-placeholder"><DIV>You can pretty much s/the =
sbc/rboc/g in this context.=A0 Leadership seems to believe that because =
those who conduct business over 'their' infrastructure aren't paying =
them a transaction fee, there's somehow something wrong with that =
model.=A0 Fact is, they _are_ getting paid for their pipes, and they've =
never been part of the transaction model (aka tax collectors).=A0 If you =
want to be something else, dump the pipes r us business model.=A0 But =
then you can't have your cake and eat it, too.=A0=A0Somehow, I'm very =
reminded of how the music industry has acted when faced with a =
disruptor.=A0 Very classic threat reponse of somebody thinking like a =
mono/duo/whateverpartitionedmarketpoly.=A0 Sections in=A0</DIV><DIV =
style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; =
margin-left: 0px; "><A =
href=3D"http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-10-31-b=
ellsouth-mergers_x.htm"><FONT class=3D"Apple-style-span" face=3D"Times =
New Roman" size=3D"4"><SPAN class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-size:=
=
14px;">http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/business/2005-10-31-be=
llsouth-mergers_x.htm</SPAN></FONT></A>=A0have publically =
confirmed=A0similar thought patterns.=A0 But then again, the CEO's of =
the companies mentioned here do look like twins separated at birth, with =
companies sharing very similar DNA (even though they all think they're =
very different).</DIV><DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; =
margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><BR =
class=3D"khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV style=3D"margin-top: 0px; =
margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">So, my point =
being in response to what Randy wrote..=A0 expect a lot more where that =
came from, especially as margins come under more pressure.=A0 As long as =
they pretend disruption can be controlled or isn't happening, this will =
continue.=A0 And one could argue that the recently approved mergers =
might fuel such attitudes.</DIV><DIV><BR =
class=3D"khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>Best =
regards,</DIV><DIV>Christian</DIV><DIV><BR =
class=3D"khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV></BODY></HTML>=
--Apple-Mail-1-163283349--
