IMHO, it is a fair statement that these peers face great uncertainty. There should not be any loss of connectivity as their transit provider should take care of business. -- Enke
Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 09:14:44 -0400 (EDT) From: Nathan Stratton <nathan@netrail.net> To: Jeremy Porter <jerry@fc.net> CC: loco@MFST.COM, nanog@merit.edu
On Wed, 1 May 1996, Jeremy Porter wrote:
|} > the Sherman Act (if memory serves). These types of problems can be q uite |} > 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?