the Internet Backbone

John Curran jcurran at
Fri Apr 5 18:07:39 UTC 1996

At 12:35 PM 4/5/96, Jim Browning wrote:

>There is no clear consensus concerning which of the facilities are "NAPs", 
>let alone which ones an ISP should participate in to be considered a 
>credible National/Backbone provider.  For instance, while MAE-West was not 
>one of the original NAPs established by NSF, it clearly qualifies in all 
>other respects.  On the other hand, I don't think it would be considered 
>necessary to be at LA, Phoenix, Tucson, Dallas, etc right now to be 
>considered a National/Backbone provider.  

Oh, I fully agree.

>The criteria I've heard most frequently is "connected to three of the 
>NAPs, peering with at least 2 national providers at each of those NAPs". 
>I believe this is what MCI  requires in order to establish peering with a 
>new entity...

Mumble.   Presumably, not every national provider will require peering
with at least two others before agreeing to peer...   the possibilities for
deadlock seem a tad high.


More information about the NANOG mailing list