[11007] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: California NAP Designed as a CIX Killer??
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Peter S. Ford)
Thu Mar 17 23:04:07 1994
From: "Peter S. Ford" <peter@goshawk.lanl.gov>
To: cook@path.net (Gordon Cook)
Cc: hwb@upeksa.sdsc.edu, com-priv@psi.com
In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 17 Mar 94 14:46:46 -0800.
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 94 16:34:44 MST
Gordon,
>>> But it would make no sense for an NSP to have one major place for peering
>>> and to connect to NAPs other than those where this place happened to be,
>>> UNLESS the NSP connected to the NAPs to peer with some other network
>>> which for some reason did not connect to the NSP's primary 'peering"
>>> place?????
Not that I can really parse this, but let me try to say something here
that may be relevent to your question.
Imagine into the future, and pick two NSPs out of many that span the
globe, and there are NAPs in every major population center of over 5
million people. These NSPs might touch down at all of those NAPs but
they may not choose to peer with each other at all of the NAPs around
the globe. They might choose to connect to all of the NAPs to pick up
some of the *other* global providers that may not connect to all of the
NAPs and to connect to *local* (e.g. national, city wide (ala cable
companies), etc.) providers.
Thinking about only a few providers, or from one provider's
perspective, a "primary peering place", etc. are probably not conducive
to building a truly large and global Internet.
peter
