[38628] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Definition of Tier-1
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Fri Jun 8 14:09:56 2001
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Austin Schutz <tex@off.org>
Cc: RJ Atkinson <rja@inet.org>,
"J.D. Falk" <jdfalk@cybernothing.org>, nanog@merit.edu
Message-Id: <E158QhK-00048v-00@roam.psg.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 14:09:26 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> If you have an ISP which is diversely connected to all other(?)
> tier-1 providers, and has a peering relationship such that the other
^ settlement-free
> tier-1s only announce the ISP's routes to their customers, then it would seem
> the ISP is from a technical standpoint a tier-1 provider.
> IMO as an engineer and not a marketeer, who pays who should not have
> bearing on that definition, though I agree that the "doesn't pay"
> definition is the one I am familiar with.
as this is nanog, not nanmg, let's stick to the old definition.
randy
