[94357] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Google wants to be your Internet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jim Popovitch)
Sat Jan 20 16:46:14 2007
From: Jim Popovitch <jimpop@yahoo.com>
To: nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20070120181211.GA7255@root.ucsc.edu>
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2007 16:41:51 -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
--=-xNiFLTX2wegRqqQxal5+
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 10:12 -0800, Mark Boolootian wrote:
>=20
> Cringley has a theory and it involves Google, video, and oversubscribed
> backbones:
>=20
> http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070119_001510.html
Aren't there some Telco laws wrt cross-state, but still interlata, calls
not being able to be charged as interstate? Perhaps Google wants to
avoid any future federal/state regulations by providing in-state (i.e.
"local") access. Additionally, it makes it easier to do state and local
govt business when the data is in the same state (it's not out-sourcing
if it's just nextdoor...). And then there is the "lobbying" issue, what
better way to lobby multiple states than do do significant business
their in? Or perhaps I'm just daydreaming too much today.... ;-)
-Jim P.
--=-xNiFLTX2wegRqqQxal5+
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQBFsoyfMyG7U7lo69MRAlBqAKCZQ8QuJ3pcHKaLUDTSPD39Fd5HqQCfS/xq
7eJ3SamY4NIskCHt1c+xX50=
=gO3j
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-xNiFLTX2wegRqqQxal5+--
