North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Historical
Re: Re: Peering Table Question
- From: Shawn McMahon
- Date: Wed Apr 19 18:45:20 2000
Unless, of course, the DoJ believes one is trying to be sneaky and get
around such concerns.
Say, because one made public statements insinuating it. :-)
On Wed, 19 Apr 2000, Randy Bush wrote:
> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 15:19:43 -0700
> To: Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net>
> From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
> Subject: Re: Peering Table Question
>
>
> sometimes paid pseudo-peering is nice because, as the payee is really a
> customer, one does not have to be as formal about consistent application
> of peering qualifications as one does for true peering, when one has to
> presume that some day one will be explaining equitable treatment to the
> doj, ec, ...
|
