nanog mailing list archives
Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus
From: Shawn McMahon <smcmahon () eiv com>
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 14:12:59 -0400
At 10:06 PM 4/3/2000 -0400, you wrote:
Interesting you should bring this up. Because one party -- the originator -- marks an electronic communique as a confidential communication, does that really require the reciever to keep it confidential?
Not in the United States. But, of course, IANAL.
Current thread:
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus, (continued)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Dustin Goodwin (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Michael Shields (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus John Payne (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Adrian Chadd (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Randy Bush (Apr 03)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Ulf Zimmermann (Apr 03)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Paul Ferguson (Apr 03)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Patrick Greenwell (Apr 03)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Barry Shein (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Ulf Zimmermann (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Shawn McMahon (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Mark Borchers (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Christian Nielsen (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Gordon Cook (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Christian Nielsen (Apr 04)
- Re: peering wars revisited? PSI vs Exodus Bill Woodcock (Apr 04)