[33299] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: UUNET peering policy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Mon Jan 8 16:51:41 2001
Date: 8 Jan 2001 13:25:25 -0800
Message-ID: <20010108212525.21127.cpmta@c004.sfo.cp.net>
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Mon, 08 January 2001, Deepak Jain wrote:
> This makes it very clear for those networks that want to consolidate their
> operations and reduce their overall transit costs. For example: a
> midsized access and a midsized web host could easily meet these
> requirements for AS701 peering; depending on your definition of a midsized
> host.
You'll find that meeting the peering "requirements" and actually obtaining
a peering agreement are two different things.
Sprint had several sets of peering requirements, nevertheless it didn't
prevent them from not setting up a single new peering agreement with a
variety of networks which met those requirements for over three years if
you believe Sprint's product manager.
