That's a non sequitur question. A circumstance in a particular market isn't "libertarian" or "not libertarian".
A libertarian would say, people should be free to make and enforce promises among themselves, and the government should constrain itself to those roles that can't be performed by markets.
Libertarians by and large don't believe in "antitrust". The market is, a libertarian would reason, inevitably more powerful than any temporarily dominant firm. If a cartel of ISPs emerged from a free-market approach to Internet governance, that cartel would either (a) be an optimal solution to the requirements of Internet users or (b) eventually worked around and eventually replaced by alternate offerings in the market.