if the owner of MAE-EAST can drop me a note....
asp at uunet.uu.net
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
> 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
--asp at uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan)
More information about the NANOG