From: (no name) (no email)
Date: Tue Nov 04 2008 - 12:34:05 EST
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 11:09:31 EST, "Patrick W. Gilmore" said:
> If Sprint & UUNET have a technical failure causing all peering to go
> down, Level 3 will not magically transport packets between the two,
> despite the fact L3 has "reliable high-bandwidth connectivity to both
> of those providers". How would you propose L3 bill UU & Sprint for
> it? On second thought, don't answer that, I don't think it would be a
> useful discussion.
You have to admit that it's probably a very tempting concept for some L3
beancounter, unless the resulting UU<-L3->Sprint firehose is too big for
L3's core to drink from...