the Internet Backbone
cnielsen at vii.com
Sat Apr 6 00:33:53 UTC 1996
On Fri, 5 Apr 1996, Paul A Vixie wrote:
> Last time this term came up, I opined that there was no "backbone" any more
> and that 1996's Internet had a "hairball topology." Vadim, among others,
> disagreed with me but we didn't pursue the topic. Perhaps we should have.
This is what I have said. I think there is 'no' backbone but
there are many NSPs that have connections to the major NAPs. There are
also compaines that connect to more than two NSPs and NAPs. Lets fiqure
this out, is there no 'backbone' or is there a 'backbone'?
> And in that sense, there is no backbone in 1996.
> We tend to reserve the term "NSP" for folks who peer at enough NAPs that they
> have no default route and aren't buying transit from anybody. We tend to use
> the term "ISP" when we mean someone in the packet or even the session business
> who _does_ have to buy transit from somebody. Once in a while I hear the term
> "backbone provider" used synonomously with "NSP" (as defined above).
I think it should be NSP.They have National Netowrks, we have
State wide netowrks. Simple.
Vyzynz International Inc. cnielsen at vii.com,CN46,KB7HAP
Phone 801-568-0999 Fax 801-568-0953
Private Email - Christian at Nielsen.Net BOFH - cnielsen at one.dot PS :)
More information about the NANOG