I think people are missing the point: If you are connected to a NAP, MAE-east, or many other interconnects, you are golden as far as domestic US connectivity. (Assuming your choice of interconnect doesn't melt in the process) The problem, for non-US providers, is that trans-US connectivity is not assured. In fact, quite the contrary. A link from Europe to an east coast interconnect could easily support traffic between Europe and all customers of all US NSPs. The problem is that unless the European provider has an explicit agreement with some US NSP, none of the NSP's will announce the European networks to the west coast interconnect necessary for the routes to reach the Pacific rim. In fact any NSP that "leaks" such routes without a contract will be providing an un-funded service to the European provider. Since the "explicit agreement" means money, all forign providers are unhappy. --MM-- P.S. Not supporting T1 NAP connections is not anti-competitive, because a T1 sized provider is far below economic scale anyhow. These days, many medium sized colleges have outgrown T1. Small regionals (1 state) are likely to be pushing Ethernet aggregate rates. You can not possibly support enough customers on a T1 to finance the coast-to-coast span. P.P.S. If I were a forign provider I would strongly consider connecting directly to an NSP, as though I were a domestic customer. The NSP can provide whatever B.W. you want, announce you to all interconnects, and deal with debugging this mess..., er I mean assuring proper operation and quality of service. I should say that I think that all of this is good, and in the end, the Internet will be better for it. Take care, --MM--