[11364] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: The whole CIX concept is flawed (as presented to the public at
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Karl Denninger)
Wed Mar 30 10:55:38 1994
From: karl@mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
To: nettech@crl.com (Joseph W. Stroup)
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 11:20:13 -0600 (CST)
Cc: karl@mcs.com, nabil@world.net, nowhere@bsu-cs.bsu.edu, com-priv@psi.com,
doyle@icp.net
In-Reply-To: <Pine.3.87.9403290801.A8549-0100000@crl.crl.com> from "Joseph W. Stroup" at Mar 29, 94 08:56:01 am
Joseph Stroup writes:
> Karl, I would suspect that you would have NOT gotten your circuit if you
> said NO to the CIX. I also suspect that selling service under these terms
> is a good way for an IXC to end up in court.
Wait a second....
SprintLink is a piece of Sprint's company, much like Alternet is a part of
UUNET. What, if any, are the issues revolving around this point? I'm not
an IXC; I understand some of the issues with LECs and the like, but not
many of the IXC issues.
Is there a legal prohibition on T&C documents as long as all of the T&Cs
are the same for all customers? (ie: non-discriminatory sales?) Can you
point to a specific point of law that prohibits this kind of thing?
I <know> that Alternet has specific terms on their deals. Try doing
resale without telling them and you could find that they "pull the plug"
on you -- cancelling on their standard 60 days notice. They reserve the
right to do that, you see, just as you do (also on 60 days notice). I was
actually told this when I inquired back in mid-1993 about exactly this --
the contract I signed was 100% silent on this point.
I will note that Ameritech apparently announced that <they> will be selling
IP services in their local service areas (!) yesterday. I haven't seen the
text of the announcement yet, but this one ought to be REAL interesting.
Ameritech, being a LEC, cannot cross LATA boundaries with their own
circuits and services. At least not yet. So how the hell are they going
to do this? That remains a very, very interesting question.
> The last thing I would do
> right now would be to hassle anyone if I were selling IP services. I
> would be quiet as a mouse and sell like hell. Its that "installed base"
> that will get you everytime ! We do it right - we do it wrong but, we do
> alot of it. That would be our motto.
>
> Joseph Stroup
I understand that point of view if you look at this discussion as "hassling".
I don't. For one, there are a hell of a lot of people out there who think
that the CIX is some bad evil monster, or that it is blocking people's
routes. I've heard that statement put in my mouth more times than I
can count in the last couple of weeks.
It just ain't so folks. With one exception that I am aware of it never
was so, and that exception happened before MCSNet was a CIX member -- thus,
the EXACT circumstances surrounding that event are not known to me (nor can
they be; I have no standing to gain access to that information).
It seems as though on this list, as well as on the net in general, people
who have an axe to grind will do anything they think they can get away with
in order to grind that axe and take swings with it - including take statements
out of context, invent positions out of whole cloth, and in general fabricate
anything that supports their point of view. They don't mind attributing it
to people they think are on the "other side" of the real issue under
discussion either.
That doesn't make it right, doesn't make it true, and its a bad idea to let
that kind of thing sit without challenge. All IMHO, of course. :-)
--
--
Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.COM) | MCSNet - Full Internet Connectivity (shell,
Modem: [+1 312 248-0900] | PPP, SLIP and more) in Chicago and 'burbs.
Voice/FAX: [+1 312 248-8649] | Email "info@mcs.com". MCSNet is a CIX member.
