On Thu, 26 July 2001, "Nipper, Arnold" wrote:

Sean Donelan schrieb:

...

exchange points. Some of the additional exchange points have grown very large, such as CIX, MAE-West, LINX, AMS-IX, even though they didn't have NSF's "stamp of approval."

Why should LINX, AMS-IX, DE-CIX or any other European IXP need NSF's "stamp of approval"?

I don't think european, japanese, or even other US IXP's require NSF's "stamp of approval." I was pointing out there are a number of IXP which were not created by NSF's process. But some folks think "NAP" refers only to the NSF identified exchange points, and unless the government approves your NAP, there is some type of anti-trust issue with ISPs deciding to exchange traffic at a non-NSF NAP. I don't think that is true. The NSF stopped funding all the NAPs several years ago. Other than a historical oddity, there is nothing different about the NSF NAP and non-NSF exchange points.