Re: Internet partitioning event regulations (was: RE: Sending vs requesting. Was: Re: Sprint / Cogent)

From: William Herrin (no email)
Date: Wed Nov 05 2008 - 17:32:53 EST

  • Next message: Scott Weeks: "Re: Internet partitioning event regulations (was: RE: Sending vs requesting. Was: Re: Sprint / Cogent)"

    On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 12:12 PM, Larry Sheldon <> wrote:
    >>> Lamar Owen wrote:
    >>>> There are three ways that I know of (feel free to add to this
    >>>> list) to limit the events: 1.) As you mentioned, regulation (or a
    >>>> government run and regulated backbone);
    >
    > Which government?

    First, let me say that I think peering regulation is a terrible idea.
    No matter how cleverly you plan it, the result will be that fewer
    small companies can participate. That's the character of regulation:
    compliance creates more barriers to entry than it removes.

    That having been said, jurisdiction is a red herring. Every
    transit-free provider does at least some of its business in the United
    States. Economic reality compels them to continue to do so for the
    foreseeable future. That's all the hook the Feds need.

    Regards,
    Bill Herrin

    -- 
    William D. Herrin ................   
    3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
    Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
    

  • Next message: Scott Weeks: "Re: Internet partitioning event regulations (was: RE: Sending vs requesting. Was: Re: Sprint / Cogent)"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD