NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
NNSquad Home Page
NNSquad Mailing List Information
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ NNSquad ] Re: Peering dispute cuts off Sprint<->Cogent Internet traffic
- To: NNSquad <nnsquad@nnsquad.org>
- Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: Peering dispute cuts off Sprint<->Cogent Internet traffic
- From: Barry Gold <bgold@matrix-consultants.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:38:07 -0700
From: Ed Jankiewicz <edward.jankiewicz@sri.com>
Subject: Total Filtering
As many news organizations are now reporting, Sprint-Nextel (Embarq) has
decided to sever its Internet connection with Cogent, another Internet
service provider. This action has caused a "hole" or "rip" in the
internet, meaning that Sprint-Nextel (Embarq) and Cogent customers may
find they cannot access resources hosted by the other company's
customers. Similar standoffs have occurred in the past, and usually one
company backs down after a few days, but no one can predict what will
happen in this case.
OK, so what has happened to the "treats censorship as damage and routes
around it" Internet? Even if Embarq and Cogent are no longer talking to
each other, the routers should be automatically finding routes via other
carriers and sending the packets -- around Robin Hood's barn if
necessary, but the Internet is supposed to be _robust_. Jon Postel
designed it that way -- I've read the RFCs. That's what ARPA specified
when they paid for the development of first the ARPANet and later the
Internet -- and what NSF paid for when they branched off NSFNet and
allowed commercial traffic.
Are these guys programming their routers to just drop packets with
certain destination IP addresses, instead of finding the shortest
available route?
I'm beginning to think that Congress (or perhaps an international body
similar to the WTO) should make the core RFCs (IP, TCP, BGP, FTP, HTTP,
SMTP, and RFC 822) have the force of law. And anybody who violates
those protocols should be fined and/or have their connections turned off.