[10669] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: clarifying earlier NAP discussion with Marvin
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Gordon Cook)
Fri Mar 4 22:36:06 1994
From: cook@path.net (Gordon Cook)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 1994 04:24:55 GMT
In-Reply-To: bmanning@is.rice.edu (William Manning)
To: bmanning@is.rice.edu
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
Buzzt - sorry my copy of the solicitation says california, chicago and new
york are "priority NAP locations"....washington only made the "desirable
nap location" list.
I have been rereading the solicitation. Question 4 appears to contain some
answers.
The language is a little mushy. Introduces a new term, an NSF specified NAP.
Now perhaps that means whatever NAPS are awarded.... ie perhaps it
includes Washington? But! Just when you think you have it Steve's crew
introduces yet another new term: "an NSF specified priority NAP" and
defines an NSP as a service provider that connects to all such. Uh
huh.... seems like an NSP then must connect to New York, Chicago and
California and need not connect to Washington. Anyone disagree?
PS I haven't found the full name of the NSP -- not saying its not there
just don't see it so far.
Welcome to the tar pits.
