if the owner of MAE-EAST can drop me a note....

Wed Sep 21 17:37:27 UTC 1994

> Rightly so.  How do you feel about language such as "MAE-East, a.k.a. DC 
> NAP"?  Or maybe just not worry about names?

I would not worry about the name.  Names seem to be a very politically
charged issue.

> 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?

MAE-East participants are not required to make any particular sort of
agreements (or, in fact, any agreements at all); its all bilateral
agreements of what ever form the parties involved come up with.

Most of the MAE-East peering agreements that I know about are of the
'no settlements' form, but I am not privy to all of the agreements, so
there may be some that involve settlements of one sort or another.

I am aware of some folks on MAE-East that peer with everybody else.
I am aware of some folks on MAE-East that peer with just a few others
and explicately do not peer with some (typically for traffic engineering
issues).

	--asp at uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan)