Re: UUNET Press Release on Peering

[Deepak Jain <deepak () jain com>]

Isn't there some issue like MCI and Sprint not being at 4 common NAPs w/ 
UUNet?

I know there is private peering going on, esp in St. Louis, but I think 
the blanket peering requirments that get exceptions (ala AGIS' 5 NAP 
requirement) are just a yard stick. If you aren't able to afford 
800k/month, don't even bother (basically). Granted, those figures don't 
seem as horrible as they were about, oh, 4 years ago...

-Deepak.

On Mon, 12 May 1997, Christopher Morrell wrote:

> Sean Donelan wrote:
>  
> > DRA doesn't have large Web farms, but people build public libaries in
> > the darndest places.  I'm always amused by providers that have peering
> > requirements their own networks, or existing 'peers' don't meet.
>
> Do you feel that UUNET's own network doesn't meet the criteria set out
> in the press release?  How so?
>
> Which of UUNET's peers who are able to continue to peer with them, would
> you say do not follow the criteria set out in the press release?
>
> Chris
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -