Gordon Cook cook at Mcs.Net
Tue Sep 6 13:03:06 UTC 1994

Thanks for an interesting reply.  I have gotten some *private* replies 
that state the preference for a NAP connect as coming from the pledge of 
the NSPs getting interregional money to peer with and accept traffic from 
ALL networks having traffic for the regionals....  NOT just those getting 
interregional money.  Is this REALLY correct?  The conditions IMPLY that 
the peering will take place WITHOUT the foreign networks having to pay 
the NSPs to do so.  If so where do you draw the line?  Can't anyone say 
that they have SOME R&E traffic therefore you must peer with me for no 
charge.  OR does the current state of routing PERMIT the other NSPs to 
accept from me ONLY packets bound for regionals?

Finally, if I come into MAE EAST and peer with the NSPs there, is there 
ANY reason to believe they would NOT send my traffic on to the 
regionals??  If not I hope someone can help me understand WHY some have 
been saying that a NAP connect would guarantee better connectivity for 
foreign nets?

Gordon Cook, Editor Publisher: COOK Report on Internet -> NREN
431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ  08618 USA
NEW E-mail: cook at
Subscriptions: $500 corporate site license; $175 edu.,non-profit & small corp.
$85 Individual

On Mon, 5 Sep 1994, Hans-Werner Braun wrote:

> >Would someone please explain why connecting to MAE East would NOT be as good 
> >as connecting to a NAP in the case that Peter ford mentions below?
> Gordon:
> No reason, I think. Providers will make individual decisions, based on
> their own judgement, guided by technical, financial, and political
> considerations. I happen to think that the NAPs are a fine thing, be it
> for primary interconnect, or as a contingency. That should not prevent
> people to find alternate means of interconnections, if they feel they
> are more sound for whatever reson they may have. If you were a
> hard-nosed non-opinionated regional/non-US/whatever service provider,
> just out to make money with your clients and needing interconnectivity,
> what would your priorities be? Stability? Cost? Need to reach above the
> 95th percentile of the community? Reputation? What would be your model
> and priorities of a good interconnect service provider in such a
> situation? If you have that model, you could create a matrix and make a
> solid decision, I would think.
> Hans-Werner

More information about the NANOG mailing list