On Tue, 20 February 2001, "Wolfgang Tremmel" wrote:

I just had a discussion with our legal advisor whether it is necessary or not to sign a peering contract with every (little) peering partner.

I know that a lot of the big ones require these contracts and I don't have a problem with that, my opinion just is that a contract with a peer who announces one /19 is not really necessary.

You have gone to the right place, your legal advisor. Your lawyer is the only one with a duty to provide accurate legal advice for your situation. In the US, the subject of peering is not one which the Statute of Frauds requires a written contract. So it is possible to have a binding legal agreement without one. However, I expect most lawyers would advise their clients it is best to have a written agreement, if only to prevent future misunderstandings about what is and is not included. Some people believe "peering" is an asset, and accounting rules require written evidence of an agreement to perform.

Another question is if there has ever been any lawsuit about peering...

I have never heard of a decision rendered by jury or court about peering. There have been legal squabbles, but so far, they've all been settled between the parties before a court entered a judgement. Several, but not all peering agreements include arbitration clauses. In the US, arbitration is considered private.