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 charged issue.
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 issues). --asp@uunet.uu.net (Andrew Partan)