steve at nsf.gov
Wed Sep 7 14:18:58 UTC 1994
> One (new) point here is the set-up removes any choice, to have govt-$ you MUST
> connect to ALL NAPs, to get connectivity to all govt-$ nets you must connect
> to all NAPs. How about making the NAPs a marketplace on day one! and make
> govt-$ only subject to connectivity to a (high) percentage of hosts on the
> Internet. Let the service providers choose their mechanisms, NAPs, GIX, CIX, ....
To get connectivity to the U.S. academic community you DO NOT have to
connect to all NAPs. Probably not even one, if you prefer.
The change is that you cannot blindly fling all your R&E traffic at a U.S.
Government-supported entity. THE U.S. R&E community is transitioning to
a state in which it purchases its commodity-level data networking in the
same way it acquires other commodities - from the marketplace; they're going
to start buying their groceries at the supermarket just like everyone else
since we're closing the government commissary.
> As an International service provider, I expect each nation to pay for their
> own network. If non-US ISPs have to pay NSPs for NAP connectivity then the
> US Internet will be subsidised by the rest of the world! Great for the US I
> guess, but not so good for global networking.
You don't pay an NSP for NAP connectivity; you pay the NAP for NAP
connectivity. If an NSP proposes to charge you for carrying your traffic
to their customers, you have the option of making the reciprocal offer.
More information about the NANOG