North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: NAP History (was RE: The large ISPs and Peering)
- From: Robert E. Seastrom
- Date: Thu Jul 26 13:09:50 2001
"Nipper, Arnold" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> 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"?
At the time, the "center of the universe" was AS690, which was paid
for by US taxpayer money and consequently had an AUP. The NAPs were
envisioned as a transitional mechanism away from that arrangement. A
lot of us at the time wondered aloud why NSF needed to provide a stamp
of approval on US-based exchange points, as the FIXes, MAE East, and
Milo's setup at NASA-Ames were already going concerns without any kind
of endorsement from the NSF. Some companies (notably UUnet) thought
this was gratuitous enough that they never showed up at any NAPs.