Re: NAP History (was RE: The large ISPs and Peering)
On Thu, 26 July 2001, steve wolff wrote:
With the impending closure of the NSFNET Backbone, and the distfribution of those funds to (academic) regional networks for the purpose of buying backbone service from ISPs on the open market, NSF feared that universal connectivity within the US higher education community might be lost - if all ISPs concerned did not peer with one another.
The NSF never required ISPs peer with one another. The requirement was to "connect" to the three primary NAPs, not exchange traffic. Universal connectivity was an issue we are still dealing with.
Accordingly, NSF established the NAPs as open exchange points, and the funds distributed to regional networks to buy backbone service had a string attached: the regionals could only buy from ISPs who agreed to come to one or more NAPs and exchange higher ed traffic. Thus the universal connectivity of the community NSF was charged to serve was aassured.
The CIX router had a mandatory peering policy, assuring universal connectivity among its members. For several years, the CIX router served as the "router of last resort." But some providers didn't like that policy. Neither MAE-East, or the NAPs had "AUPs" covering traffic exchange.
NSF never intended the NAPs to be the ONLY peering/exchange points, and never contemplated a 'stamp of approval' (or disapproval, for that matter) for anybody else's exchange point; the NAPs were inclusive, not exclusive.
Comments inline... -s On Thursday 26 July 2001 16:24, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Thu, 26 July 2001, steve wolff wrote:
With the impending closure of the NSFNET Backbone, and the distfribution of those funds to (academic) regional networks for the purpose of buying backbone service from ISPs on the open market, NSF feared that universal connectivity within the US higher education community might be lost - if all ISPs concerned did not peer with one another.
The NSF never required ISPs peer with one another. The requirement was to "connect" to the three primary NAPs, not exchange traffic. Universal connectivity was an issue we are still dealing with.
NSF placed the requirement on the regionals - not the NAPs nor the ISPs. Universal connectivity WAS maintained - for that community.
Accordingly, NSF established the NAPs as open exchange points, and the funds distributed to regional networks to buy backbone service had a string attached: the regionals could only buy from ISPs who agreed to come to one or more NAPs and exchange higher ed traffic. Thus the universal connectivity of the community NSF was charged to serve was aassured.
The CIX router had a mandatory peering policy, assuring universal connectivity among its members. For several years, the CIX router served as the "router of last resort." But some providers didn't like that policy.
And still don't...
Neither MAE-East, or the NAPs had "AUPs" covering traffic exchange.
Quite right; the NAPs were AUP-free - taking advantage of a special exemption granted by the US Congress the year before.
NSF never intended the NAPs to be the ONLY peering/exchange points, and never contemplated a 'stamp of approval' (or disapproval, for that matter) for anybody else's exchange point; the NAPs were inclusive, not exclusive.
-- Stephen Wolff 202 362 7110 voice Office of the CTO 202 362 7224 fax Cisco Systems 202 427 6752 mobile
participants (2)
-
Sean Donelan -
steve wolff