NAP Architecture

Dave Rand dlr at
Wed Oct 29 17:17:48 UTC 1997

[In the message entitled "Re: NAP Architecture" on Oct 29,  8:25, "Ben Kirkpatrick, ELI" writes:]
>    Forgive my ignorance on these matters, but why haven't many NAPS tried
> to be L1 based, or at least provide the option of private wire/fiber
> between the larger customers in the same room.  It seems to me that this
> would significantly reduce the complexity and packet-loss we're currently
> seeing.  How long would it take to troubleshoot a cross-over FE compared
> to trouble shooting two routers connected via a oversubscribed switch.
>    Marketing types are concerned about how to bill and track these, but
> there should be some easy ways around those issues.

This is a critical issue now.  MFS is charging up to $1000 per 50'
stretch of wire, for cross-connects between consenting parties at

I think this is bit high, for $27 worth of wire, and $300 worth of

Is there a way that we can collectively negotiate a lower rate for private
cross connects at the maes?

Dave Rand
dlr at

More information about the NANOG mailing list