North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: UUNET Press Release on Peering
Isn't there some issue like MCI and Sprint not being at 4 common NAPs w/ UUNet? I know there is private peering going on, esp in St. Louis, but I think the blanket peering requirments that get exceptions (ala AGIS' 5 NAP requirement) are just a yard stick. If you aren't able to afford 800k/month, don't even bother (basically). Granted, those figures don't seem as horrible as they were about, oh, 4 years ago... -Deepak. On Mon, 12 May 1997, Christopher Morrell wrote: > Sean Donelan wrote: > > > DRA doesn't have large Web farms, but people build public libaries in > > the darndest places. I'm always amused by providers that have peering > > requirements their own networks, or existing 'peers' don't meet. > > Do you feel that UUNET's own network doesn't meet the criteria set out > in the press release? How so? > > Which of UUNET's peers who are able to continue to peer with them, would > you say do not follow the criteria set out in the press release? > > Chris > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|