[10967] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: California NAP Designed as a CIX Killer??
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Farooq Hussain)
Wed Mar 16 22:05:54 1994
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 1994 22:06:11 -0500
To: cook@path.net (Gordon Cook)
From: farooq@sprintlink.net (Farooq Hussain)
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
Gordon
>Peter - are you saying that those who connect to a NAP may choose to peer
>(do I use the right term?) only with whatever subset of NAP connectees they
>choose?
>
>Take the California NAP as an example. Say it has 30 networks connected. To
>paick an aribtary number are you saying that five of those 30 are perfectly
>free to peer with each other and NEED NOT PEER with anyone else??
This is not as incredulous as you make it sound. Just suppose that a NAP
attached network at one NAP has its transit managed by an NSP that attaches
to all NAPS. If this were the case it would have a number of perfectly
legitimate technical and financial reasons to peer only with specified
networds at the point of its own NAP attachement (assuming it's only
attached to one NAP).
Farooq Hussain
