[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: understanding consensus



Two comments:

1) So then, if no-one on my list but UUnet is building backbones, who
is.  I would love to know what you are talking about.

2)  I notice that you deleted almost all of JP's comments but managed to
include mine, any reason behind that "Kansas City Kid"?

Vince Wolodkin


Jeff Williams wrote:
> 
> Vince,
> 
>   Please read below your comments.
> 
> Vince Wolodkin wrote:
> >
> > Since your email address is non-existent, and since I just CAN'T sit
> > here without replying, I am doing so through the list.  They just may
> > find your TRUE feelings enlightening.
> >
> 
> > >
> > > Of course we are. What the FUCK is wrong with that???
> > >
> >
> > Nothing, but I feel that the end-users are the people to protect here.
> > Absent any meaningful regulation of this process, we need to institute a
> > system where the user is protected.
> >
> >
> > Great, spend away.  It's good for the internet, it's bad for you.  News
> > Flash, you are not the internet.
> >
> 
> > I seriously doubt that without you the internet would disappear
> > overnight.  I think you overrate yourself.  Plenty of companies will be
> > willing to provide internet connectivity WITHOUT raping the public for a
> > domain name.
> > > Whats wrong with people getting rich? Whats wrong with people making
> > > money and using it to develope and deploy multi-gigabit switching nodes
> > > for internet backbone traffic - what the fuck do you think - that
> > > this hardware grows on trees. It costs $30k for a lousy little Cisco
> > > 4000 with one DS-3 connection and a few T-1's. How much do you think
> > > a whole switchroom of fiber optics and Cisco 7500 Packet switches
> > > would cost. (I'll give you a hint - we are involved in the design of
> > > one now: Try about $23 million dollars).
> > >
> > > Who pays for all of this??
> > >
> >
> > Well, lots of companies manage to make money AND provide large
> > backbones.  I think I call them MCI, UUnet, PSI, and Sprint.  They seem
> > to be able to afford all of this without robbing the public.  I don't
> > see how your business expenses lead to the justification that you should
> > be allowed to monopolize a public trust.
> 
>   Well, I wouldn't include MCI, PSI and sprint.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
> Information Eng. Group.
> Phone :972-447-1878
> E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com