[AusNOG] Vocus vs. Pipe - Was: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?

[Narelle]

Well, perhaps it's time to conduct our own enquiry.

If the issue is misuse of market power, or inappropriate regional
"collaboration", or some other anticompetitivr behaviour, then the ACCC
should be called to act.

Perhaps we could aggregate the complaints? Perhaps a 'supercomplaint' is
warranted? I can't tell without looking at the evidence.

This particular situation is rather looking like a case of commercial
arrangements and thought out business deals rather than anything malign.

It's not a misuse of market power to rehome your network (unless you're
deliberately trying to manipulate the market) and you don't have to tell
downstream players about it beforehand.

Routing will tell thr truth to all in the end...

Happy to help compile complaints if people want.

What do you think?

Narelle Clark
president at isoc-au.org.au
On Nov 16, 2012 8:20 PM, "Chris Ricks" <chrisr at securepay.com.au> wrote:

> The word "ACCC" is the cause of the current problem, and many of us have
> written to them seeking a review of the situation.
>
> We've gotten either zero response or statements that the market does not
> need reexamining.
>
> On 16/11/2012 7:59 PM, Narelle wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Chris Ricks
>> <chris.ricks at securepay.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> They could peer right now if they chose to, but the vast majority of
>>> large corporates seem to have a poorly thought out single-provider
>>> strategy in my experience.
>>>
>> Large corporations don't peer because their comms staff haven't come
>> from the Inernet world and don't get it.
>>
>> And I have one word for all of you in this thread: ACCC.
>>
>> No need to write to the government for a saviour - the ACCC mandated
>> peering quite some time ago.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20121117/52827b8e/attachment.html>