different thinking on exchanging traffic

Wed Jun 3 14:57:20 UTC 1998

On Mon, Jun 01, 1998 at 02:24:41PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > I think there's a lot of merit to this proposal. When I first signed on with
> > a local Internet provider, the owner explained to me that GEOGRAPHIC
> > proximity does not always equal INTERNET proximity. Back then (1991-92)
> > there was not a lot of infrastructure, so often that couldn't be helped. It's
> > quite different now, though.
> 
> No it's not.
> 
> There's still little confluence between the two distance metrics.  :-)

That wasn't my argument; my argument was that there wasn't a lot that could
be done about the lack of confluence. :) Now, with medium-sized cities like
Cleveland covered by several different national NSP's as well as regional
NSP's and ISP's, there isn't much of a reason that things should stay that
way.

> You're correct in noting that the infrastructure will support it now,
> though.

Thank you. :)

-- 
Steven J. Sobol - Founding Member, Postmaster/Webmaster, ISP Liaison --
Forum for Responsible & Ethical E-mail (FREE) - Dedicated to education about,
and prevention of, Unsolicited Broadcast E-mail (UBE), also known as SPAM.
Info: http://www.ybecker.net