Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 6:21:11 -0500 (CDT) From: Sean Donelan <SEAN@SDG.DRA.COM> To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Best way to deal with bad advertisements?

...

Just to add a bit to that, the US Government could force providers to peer with all providers meeting certain requirements (enter telco history) but I think there would be difficulty requiring them to peer with non-US companies.

Actually the US Government already has such a policy. Buried deep inside the original NSF NAP solicitation was the requirement any provider must peer with any other provider connected to all three priority NAPs, or it would not qualify as an NSP for NSF connection grants.

The solicitation, NSF 93-52, specifies that "To qualify for NSF support for NSP attachment and/or for the provision of interNAP connectivity, a regional network must attach to an NSP that connects all NSF- specified priority NAPs." (Section III.F) Note the use of the term "connects." I didn't re-read the whole solicitation, but I believe it is silent on the topic of peering. There were some conversations on this topic after the fact, so something reguarding peering might be in some of the relevant cooperative agreements. However, these agreements might apply only to research and educations traffic.

There was no requirement for minimum connection speed to a NAP or between the NAPs to qualify as an NSP. [...]

Solicitation NSF 93-52 specifies "Networks attaching to NAPs must operate at speeds of 1.5 Mbps or greater and must be able to switch both IP and CLNP packets." (Section III.F). -tjs