1 May
1996
1 May
'96
9:14 a.m.
On Wed, 1 May 1996, Jeremy Porter wrote:
|} > the Sherman Act (if memory serves). These types of problems can be quite |} > nasty, involving treble punitive damages.
Unfortunately for Nathan, this above is wrong.
There are very real engineering reasons for not peering if someone is at one NAP/MAE. Also since Sprint and MCI do have published policies, if they made exceptions to them they could get sued for discriminating against some competators (not all, makes a big legal difference).
Ok, so what about Interpath, CAIS, and a bunch more that are peering with MCI and are at only 1 NAP?