request for help w/ ATT and terminology

Thu Jan 17 12:45:56 UTC 2008

Tony Li wrote:
> On Jan 16, 2008, at 1:37 PM, Mike Donahue wrote:

>> Anyway, it's all getting (for us) pretty complicated.   We're a fairly
>> small firm and just want an Ethernet handoff with our IP block on it.
>> Sprint didn't blink at the request, but AT&T...  We're getting a good
>> rate from AT&T for the IP services because it's at their colo.
>> Switching back to Sprint would definitely be more costly.

> Please renumber into an AT&T prefix.

Yeah, because that's what's best for everyone else in the world *except*
him.

I understand the desire to keep from exploding the routing tables, but
come on.  You big ISP folks need to remember that you exist to provide
service to customers.  Without the customers, sure, the explosion of
routing tables wouldn't be a problem, but then you'd certainly have
bigger problems to think about.

(Sorry, I just get a bit frustrated with the coercion that big ISPs
bring about to the little guys expecting the little guys to explicitly
choose to do things in ways that are harmful to their own self-interests)
-- 
Jeff McAdams
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                                       -- Benjamin Franklin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20080117/2d9c1dd9/attachment.sig>