[2396] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: the Internet Backbone
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Fri Apr 5 13:11:20 1996
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1996 13:07:39 -0500
To: Jim Browning <jfbb@atmnet.net>
From: John Curran <jcurran@bbnplanet.com>
Cc: "nanog@merit.edu" <nanog@merit.edu>
At 12:35 PM 4/5/96, Jim Browning wrote:
>There is no clear consensus concerning which of the facilities are "NAPs",
>let alone which ones an ISP should participate in to be considered a
>credible National/Backbone provider. For instance, while MAE-West was not
>one of the original NAPs established by NSF, it clearly qualifies in all
>other respects. On the other hand, I don't think it would be considered
>necessary to be at LA, Phoenix, Tucson, Dallas, etc right now to be
>considered a National/Backbone provider.
Oh, I fully agree.
>The criteria I've heard most frequently is "connected to three of the
>NAPs, peering with at least 2 national providers at each of those NAPs".
>I believe this is what MCI requires in order to establish peering with a
>new entity...
Mumble. Presumably, not every national provider will require peering
with at least two others before agreeing to peer... the possibilities for
deadlock seem a tad high.
/John
