[5612] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Ungodly packet loss rates
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Kent W. England)
Tue Oct 22 17:40:42 1996
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 12:39:59 -0700
To: Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com>
From: "Kent W. England" <kwe@6SigmaNets.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
At 04:49 PM 21-10-96 -0700, Michael Dillon wrote:
>On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, Jon Zeeff wrote:
>
>> In other words, the big players don't like the "open" naps and
>> are deliberately not installing sufficient bandwidth to them?
>
>No, the open NAP's are bad engineering and the big players are fixing the
>topology by routing around them.
>
If you want a private interconnect to avoid having to deal with 100 peering
requests per week from every Tom, Dick and Harriet's web page services, OK.
But there isn't any gee-whiz technology that you can do at a private
interconnect
that you can't do at a NAP/MAE. Open NAPs aren't bad engineering.
--Kent
speaking as a consultant to PacBell NAP services
