[10915] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Why a NAP? [was Re: "Fed **deal** may speed]
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bob Collet, Sprint)
Mon Mar 14 12:09:11 1994
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 1994 07:30:45 -0500
From: "Bob Collet, Sprint" <rcollet@sprintlink.net>
To: kwe@cerf.net (Kent W. England)
Cc: "com-priv" <com-priv@psi.com>
Kent, I don't think the NSF will be out much in the way of "big" dollars if
the NAPs we're a non event. The money spent on the RA can go a long way in
enabling more efficient and less router CPU/memory implementations.
--bob
> Date: Sun, 13 Mar 1994 18:59:40 -0800
> Message-Id: <199403140259.SAA27893@is.internic.net>
> X-Sender: kwe@is.internic.net
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> To: Bob Collet <rcollet@sprintlink.net>
> From: kwe@cerf.net (Kent W. England)
> Subject: Why a NAP? [was Re: "Fed **deal** may speed]
> Cc: "com-priv" <com-priv@psi.com>
>
> At 7:15 AM 3/13/94 -0500, Bob Collet wrote:
> >I think what the NSF is trying to do is
> >prevent fragmentation of the Internet by facilitating and easy-to-get-
> >to and easy-to-use (Routing Arbiter) interconnection point.
> >Hopefully, this makes for a stronger and more robust Internet market
> >for the service providers and enhanced utility for customers through
> >shorter paths and full connectivity. Even if for some reason they are
> >suboptimal but still a net gain, what's the big deal in making 3 NAP
> >connections? Cost will be next to nothing.
>
> Right on target, Bob. What some seem to be forgetting is that NSF
> needs to connect the vBNS to the rest of the Internet for its own
> purposes and not necessarily to once again serve as the interconnect-of-
> last-resort for everyone (let CIX or other do that). NAPs are an
> improvement over the FIXes (should be fewer political problems and less
> bureaucracy).
>
> NSF needs three NAPs (min) to avoid the one-CIX syndrome with its
> attendant economic disadvantage to some CIX members.
>
> Connect or not as you choose, NSF still needs the NAPs for those who
> connect. And if it turns out to be not worth the effort, then the NSF
> will be out all those big NAP funding dollars, right, Bob? :-)
>
> --Kent
>
>
>
