if the owner of MAE-EAST can drop me a note....
steve at nsf.gov
Wed Sep 21 15:35:20 UTC 1994
> MFS Datanet provides the service known as MAE-East to a group of
> customers who created and define it by what they are willing
> to pay for. There is no single entity which "owns" it in any real sense.
> MFS owns the facilities which provide the service, but MAE-East as a concept
> is really more of a cooperative and there isn't any obvious "owner".
OK. Customers, no owner. Same arrangement MFS has with NAP-attachers.
> This is precisely why MFS got in seriously hot water with the MAE-East
> customers when they wanted to rename MAE-East the DC NAP - MAE-East ain't
> truly theirs to rename in a very real sense.
Rightly so. How do you feel about language such as "MAE-East, a.k.a. DC
NAP"? Or maybe just not worry about names?
> That's what make responding to your otherwise quite reasonable request
> rather tricky, short of convening a MAE-East customer plenary, which MFS
> *has* undertaken once before (when the group was rather smaller).
Are the MAE-East participants required to subscribe to CIX-like "must carry"
and "no settlements" agreements? Or - more to the point - have they agreed
not to enter into bi- or multi-lateral agreements with other IP carriers
they may stumble across on the MFS DC infrastructure. I.e., is it
permissible for some or all of the MAE-East participant/customers to make
"arrangements" with some or all of the DC NAP customers?
If so, that's the desired (by NSF) result; I'll shut up and stay out of
the way, and let the historians worry about what was named what.
If not, perhaps we can find a way to negotiate in absurdity avoidance
More information about the NANOG