More on Vonage service disruptions...

Niels Bakker niels=nanog at
Thu Mar 3 23:17:29 UTC 2005

* tls at (Thor Lancelot Simon) [Thu 03 Mar 2005, 23:01 CET]:
> On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 09:46:05AM -0600, Church, Chuck wrote:
>> Another thing for an ISP considering blocking VoIP is the fact that
>> you're cutting off people's access to 911.  That alone has got to have
>> some tough legal ramifications.  I can tell you that if my ISP started
>> blocking my Vonage, my next cell phone call would be my attorney... 
> Why?  Do you have a binding legal agreement with your ISP that requires
> them to pass all traffic?  Do you really think you can make a
> persuasive case that you have an implicit agreement to that effect?

Why, yes, an agreement for Internet access.  The end-to-end principle is
considered an integral part of the design (and power) of the Internet.

Kindergarten ISPs exist but I do not buy from them.  And the verbiage in
the contract is that the ISP doesn't guarantee access but will do its
best to provide and keep offering such.

> The 911 issue is a tremendous red herring.  In fact, it's more of a
> red halibut, or perhaps a red whale.  Vonage fought tooth-and-nail

... and then you spend two entire pages derailing the debate towards
emergency services.  Thanks!

Any provider intentionally causing deterioration of network performance
towards a competitor's service offering is engaging in anticompetitive
behaviour.  This may be merely bad or legally suicidal.

	-- Niels.

                              The idle mind is the devil's playground

More information about the NANOG mailing list