Well, I wouldn't be suprised if more of this continues to occur.

IMHO, peering is currently a huge financial bean for the counters,
along with being a strategic bean. Significant amounts of money
ride on peering. Let's say that AGIS is the only hold out for DIGEX
to go defaultless. If this is the case, and the traffic from DIGEX to
AGIS is significant, DIGEX could be forced to spend a not in-
significant amount of money to resolve said issue. Technically,
if they had to, the best choice would be to purchase said circuit
from AGIS (I wonder if they would do this?). Either way, they
end up purchasing a circuit from thier competitor. But this is
peering 101, and doesn't belong on this list....

Anyway, my point is that peering has become a financial decision,
and sooner or later people are going to start throwing them
attourney types at these things. And many companies will have a
good case, when the issue is between two companies of
equivalent "net worth". This is begging for the folks in DC to get
thier paws in on this. Those of us who have spent previous
time in regulated industries probably know that this is NOT
in our best interests, no matter which side of the issue you
are on.

Chris A. Icide
Nap.Net, L.L.C.