[10975] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: ANS and the CIX - have they really connected?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joseph W. Stroup)
Thu Mar 17 01:49:23 1994
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 1994 22:46:59 -0800 (PST)
From: "Joseph W. Stroup" <nettech@crl.com>
To: Farooq Hussain <farooq@sprintlink.net>
Cc: Gordon Cook <cook@path.net>, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: <9403170542.AA22759@sprintlink.net>
An interesting response, do you suppose there was any pre-plan for this
action ?
Joseph Stroup
On Thu, 17 Mar 1994, Farooq Hussain wrote:
> Gordon
> >Anyone in CIX have a count on how many current CIX members there are?
>
> Your whole line is missing the point. The future is not a CIX members vs
> NAPs. The fact is the CIX came about at a time when commercial service
> providers felt compelled to peer with NSFNET/ANS. The solicitation has put
> and end to this, so the CIX members have to find a new purpose to life. For
> the CIX (physical) in Santa Clara may be its bye bye. For CIX members a new
> relationship based around a MAE-East concept is probably a HELLO. The NAPs
> are not an artifact they are a trading place. The NSf can only help to put
> them into being, which is what they are trying to do. The only problem I
> can forsee (which does not seem to be the case), is a restraint of trade,
> whereby regions are compelled to to connect to a NAP not of there choosing
> by federal authority.
>
> Farooq Hussain
>
>
>
