[4010] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Agenda for next NANOG
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Avi Freedman)
Wed Sep 4 10:17:30 1996
From: Avi Freedman <freedman@netaxs.com>
To: bmanning@ISI.EDU
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 09:41:12 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: peterf@microsoft.com, randy@psg.com, dorian@cic.net, jjs@sprint.net,
nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199609040145.AA06522@zed.isi.edu> from "bmanning@ISI.EDU" at Sep 3, 96 06:45:12 pm
> > Looking at it strictly from a technical level, there is little difference
> > between a private interconnect and the connection between an ISP and their
> > upstream provider if they have one. (we might consider debating this
> > assumption especially in terms of scale :-))
>
> Actually, the traditional point2point link between any
> two ISPs is a private interconnect. It does not have to
> be a provider/subscriber relationship.
>
> --bill
Except for what one does to/with the routes learned via the BGP session
involved in such an interconnect... With a "private interconnect" between
"peers" one does not redistribute routes heard from one peer to another;
with a "upstream" - "downstream" relationship, one does redistribute routes
hears from one peer to another, thus giving the "downstream" transit to
those other peers.
I'm clarifying for others; I know you understand the difference :)
Avi
