a question about the economics of peering

Alex Rubenstein alex at nac.net
Sat Dec 1 03:39:57 UTC 2001

Nigel, Nanog:

The original intent of the inquiry was not to bring into question the
intelligence of Nigel; I can't speak to that since I don't know him, nor
did I even know of him. My communication also does not speak to the
potential success of PacketExchange.

My question was simply a curiosity ping of _why_ people peer with each
other; in my mind, it had always, and never not, been a way to reduce cost
of traffic sent/rec'd. I was curious as to whether or not others had a
similar view to mine.

On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Nigel Titley wrote:

> Folks,
> I'm stood to one side up to now, but now this thread is drifting over to
> personal abuse.
> I was the engineer in question, and I was most certainly not trying to
> hoodwink or bamboozle. Neither am I an ignorant sales-droid, as someone
> else has said. Those of you who know me, as I think that a fair number
> of people on this list do, will vouch for my honesty, and my pedigree in
> the industry.
> I think Alex misunderstood what I was trying to say, and since we were
> shouting at each other down a very bad phone line with a loudspeaking
> phone at either end, he's got a certain amount of excuse.

-- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex at nac.net, latency, Al Reuben --
--    Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net   --

More information about the NANOG mailing list