On Mon, 29 Apr 1996, M. Christopher Davies wrote:
On Mon, 29 Apr 1996, Nathan Stratton wrote:
On Mon, 29 Apr 1996, Ali Marashi wrote:
(2) Could anyone share opinions/facts regarding why organizations may or may not exchange routes via the Route Servers rather than direct peering relationships at the NAPs?
Well, because say that Sprint and MCI would peer, a provider would only just stay at one NAP. That provider could then sell large dedicated connections and in a way do it on Sprint's and MCI's network. I think they they are trying to keep a lot of startups like me from growing and being a large competitor.
I think you've completely missed the boat on 1) what it means to peer, and 2) why one would peer with you.
The idea (and I may be wrong here) that the big 6 may or may not choose to peer with you is because they have no contract to provide TRANSIT for your packets, but will gladly accept your packets for MCI or Sprint connected sites. The idea behind peering is that it is a shared dropoff point, but not a free transit to wherever on the net you want to go.
No I think you are vary wrong, I know what it is to peer, and I am not askign for TRANSIT. Sprint and MCi will nto PEER unless you are at 3 NAPS.
If you peer, it is expected that you will not utilize MCI's (as an example) network to talk to a non-MCI connected site on the other side of
No kiding.
That, I believe, is the reason that people don't peer as readily as you want them to.
You have no idea. Nathan Stratton CEO, NetRail, Inc. Tracking the future today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone (703)524-4800 NetRail, Inc. Fax (703)534-5033 2007 N. 15 St. Suite 5 Email sales@netrail.net Arlington, Va. 22201 WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Access: (703) 524-4802 guest --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34