Big providers use NAT to squeeze little ISPs

Thu Feb 27 01:04:42 UTC 1997

Keep the ad-hominen and invective out of the discussion.

I will return to talk about this when you have restarted your question with
an understanding of the above.

--
-- 
Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - The Finest Internet Connectivity
http://www.mcs.net/~karl     | T1's from $600 monthly to FULL DS-3 Service
			     | 99 Analog numbers, 77 ISDN, Web servers $75/mo
Voice: [+1 312 803-MCS1 x219]| Email to "info at mcs.net" WWW: http://www.mcs.net/
Fax:   [+1 312 803-4929]     | 2 FULL DS-3 Internet links; 400Mbps B/W Internal

> 
>   Karl,
> 
>   Will you please explain to me how it is that the evil greedy
>   conspiring bastards use their size dishonestly to slant the
>   playing field?  Please list the set of differentiated dishonest
>   benefits.
> 
>   Besides, I was always under the impression that it wasn't the size
>   of the money that mattered, but rather how you moved it.
> 
>   -alan
> 
> > >   Karl,
> > > 
> > >   Sometimes I think you work for the Yoyodyne Corporation
> > >   from some movie or another.
> > > 
> > >   Tell you what.
> > > 
> > >   You watch the capitalist system of our country reward
> > >   companies that utilize new technology to encourage better service.
> > 
> > I happen to like that model.  A lot.
> > 
> > The problem is, lots of people like to slant the playing field so that only
> > the guys on the top of the money pile can play in the same theatre, and
> > everyone else is relegated to the bottom.
> > 
> > There are some benefits of size that really are honestly earned.  Then there
> > are those which are just plain improper (at minimum).
> > 
> > The trick is to differentiate between them.
> 