re: Sprints definition on NAPs (question)

[Michael Dillon <michael () memra com>]

On Mon, 29 Apr 1996, John Scoggin wrote:

> The other question that should be asked (and I hope some folks have looked at 
> this) is whether this rule is in fact arbitrary.  If there is no sound 
> ENGINEERING reason, it may constitute "restraint of trade" under Chapter 2 of 
> the Sherman Act (if memory serves). 

The original poster, Marcos Della, mentioned he couldn't get any info out
of Sprint's *SALES* dept. This is half the problem. Peering is an
engineering issue far more than a sales issue and you will never get
anywhere talking to the sales dept.

Of course, the engineering dept. is too bust doing engineering to take
time out to talk to you and hold your hand, so what do you do?

Well, it's like applying for a job. Research the company, research the
position, then find the right person to send your application to. In this
case it is more like, research the technology (BGP etc...), research
the concept of peering at a NAP, and find the right engineers to talk to.

The last part is the easiest, because all you need to do is attend a few
NANOG meetings in person. A nice side effect is that the speakers at the
NANOG meetings will educate you in some of the things you need to know and
help you find out what you don't know yet. Basically, if there is anything
that you don't understand from one of the presentations, that indicates an
area in which you need to do further study in order to reach an acceptable
level of competence.

Just remember the plain English meaning of the word "peer". It refers to
an individual who is at the same level as you. Same level of power (CEO
vs. engineer), same level of skill (PhD vs undergrad) and so on.


Michael Dillon                                    Voice: +1-604-546-8022
Memra Software Inc.                                 Fax: +1-604-546-3049
http://www.memra.com                             E-mail: michael () memra com