|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Comments
Stephen Wolff wrote ... > > So long as ALL NSPs agree to peer at MAE-East then things should be OK, as no > > transit is needed because all the regionals are connected by their individual > > service provider. However there is no REQUIREMENT to peer. I am looking for > > NSF to make this a requirement (at least for a year or so) to ensure continued > > ubiquitous connectivity. > > It **IS** a requirement of NSF - if you connect to any NAP, but not if > you connect to MAE-East, the CIX, the GIX, the SWAB or the Dundalk > Consolidated International Three Hundred Baud Interconnect (local reference). > The NSF-sponsored NAPs are the only places where we have the right to > shape policy. > > -s > > ...end Sorry, I can't let you get away with that statement! You can shape peering policy WITHOUT specifying the location of the interconnect. The customer wants connectivity, not NAPs! Why doesn't NSF specify connectivity rather than means? Does NFS want to ensure IT controls the Internet by controling some of the major interconnect? Hell I keep getting more and more paranoid Peter Internet:- The right to say what you want to the world, and for them not to listen - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|