nanog mailing list archives
Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION
From: Sean Donelan <sean () donelan com>
Date: 12 Nov 2000 18:01:00 -0800
On Sun, 12 November 2000, "Mark Mentovai" wrote:
The drive to "slam" is pushed by dollars. I can't think of any situation in which someone might profit from announcing address space without authorization. The problems facing the Internet are mostly due to laziness and lack of clue, enabled by an experimental infrastructure designed to support neither of these things. IP assumes non-hostile, non-lazy, and non-clueless nodes.
Sure it is. When I asked why did providers announced addresses improperly, I've been told by both Sprint and UUNET engineers "because they paid us and you don't."
Current thread:
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION, (continued)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION Mark Mentovai (Nov 12)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION J Bacher (Nov 13)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION Daniel L. Golding (Nov 13)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION David Diaz (Nov 13)
- NIC Handles Walters (Nov 14)
- Re: NIC Handles Steve Sobol (Nov 14)
- Re: NIC Handles Eric Whitehill (Nov 14)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION J Bacher (Nov 13)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION Mark Mentovai (Nov 12)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION John Fraizer (Nov 13)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION Mark Mentovai (Nov 12)
- Re: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION Daniel L. Golding (Nov 12)
- RE: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION John Fraizer (Nov 13)
- RE: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION Randy Bush (Nov 13)
- RE: MCI WORLDCOM TO PAY $3.5 MILLION Rich Fulton (Nov 13)