[8602] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: CIX COnnectivity
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dick St.Peters)
Thu Nov 25 14:54:55 1993
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 93 14:44:43 EST
From: stpeters@spare-parts.crd.ge.com (Dick St.Peters)
To: Paul.Rarey@ssf-sys.dhl.com
Cc: com-priv@psi.com
Reply-To: <stpeters@dawn.crd.ge.com>
> From: Paul Rarey <Paul.Rarey@ssf-sys.dhl.com>
> On Nov 24, 11:06, John [Francis] Stracke wrote:
> > Subject: CIX COnnectivity
> } It was expressed fairly well just the other day: ANS sees itself as a
> } transit service; CIX sees itself as an exchange. When you contract
> } with ANS to carry your packets, ANS will carry them, without caring
> } where they come from; CIX, on the other hand, only exchanges packets
> } among CIX members.
Gordon Cook, if you're reading this, you have the answer to one of
your questions: why the CIX hasn't established CIX East ... as soon
as they do, they become a transit service.
Both bbn.com and ftp.x.org are in Cambridge, Mass, 150 miles from here.
Packets we send to ftp.x.org are given to PSI, which send them to that
wonderful node with the NSF trapped between CO+RE and PSI:
core.ithaca.ny.nsf.psi.net
>From there they make it pretty promptly to Cambridge via ANS.
BUT packets we send to bbn.com are sent by PSI all the way across the
continent to the CIX for handing off to ANS, which then has to bring
them all the way back. Once they get back, they actually go through
the same gateways in the Hartford and Boston areas.
--
Dick St.Peters
GE Corporate R&D, Schenectady, NY stpeters@dawn.crd.ge.com
