GLBX De-Peers Intercage [Was: RE: Washington Post: Atrivo/Intercag e, w hy are we peering with the American RBN?]

Valdis.Kletnieks at Valdis.Kletnieks at
Mon Sep 1 10:08:20 CDT 2008

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 09:21:24 CDT, "Laurence F. Sheldon, Jr." said:
> Valdis.Kletnieks at wrote:
> > On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:48:12 -0000, Paul Ferguson said:
> >> Is this an issue that network operations folk don't really care
> >> about?
> > 
> > If somebody's paying you $n/megabyte for transit/connectivity, what's your
> > incentive to make them clean up their act and get rid of their P2P filesharing
> > traffic, spam traffic, and so on?
> What is your price for cocaine?

No, seriously.. If, as some estimates have it, 80% of the traffic is P2P, and
as other estimates have it, 90% of that is copyright-infringing, then if that
traffic disappears, anybody who was selling transit for that traffic is
going to take a *big* revenue hit.

And similarly, if you're selling transit to somebody who's then (eventually)
reselling a pipe to Atrivio/Intercage or the RBN, turning that somebody off
because they won't turn off the bad guys is going to make a dent in the
bottom line.

I think it's very disingenuous to pretend that there have been *no* providers
that haven't said to themselves "We're selling to scum, but it pays the bills,
and we'd be in bankruptcy court otherwise..."

The fact that bad guys don't seem to have *any* trouble getting connectivity
once they finally *do* get kicked off a provider is proof enough that:

a) There exist providers that are willing to take money from scum.
b) We won't get rid of the scum until we admit (a) is true.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list