North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: NAP History (was RE: The large ISPs and Peering)
"Nipper, Arnold" <[email protected]> writes: > Sean Donelan schrieb: > > > exchange points. Some of the additional exchange points have grown very > > large, such as CIX, MAE-West, LINX, AMS-IX, even though they didn't have > > NSF's "stamp of approval." > > > > Why should LINX, AMS-IX, DE-CIX or any other European IXP need NSF's "stamp > of approval"? At the time, the "center of the universe" was AS690, which was paid for by US taxpayer money and consequently had an AUP. The NAPs were envisioned as a transitional mechanism away from that arrangement. A lot of us at the time wondered aloud why NSF needed to provide a stamp of approval on US-based exchange points, as the FIXes, MAE East, and Milo's setup at NASA-Ames were already going concerns without any kind of endorsement from the NSF. Some companies (notably UUnet) thought this was gratuitous enough that they never showed up at any NAPs. ---Rob
|