nanog mailing list archives
Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations
From: jakob () jubii dk (Jakob Faarvang)
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 20:07:04 GMT
I think the argument is undermined by the fact that peering in Europe is in a fairly dismal state. Were there a MAE-{London, Paris, Prague} I somehow think that the big five at least might throw a T3 or two over. Until that happens, nothing will change. Maybe as access points start springing up in Japan, the Phillipines, etc., the roadblocks to such a cooperative project will start to be removed.
This deserves some explanation. Peering in Europe is actually pretty good, with international perring points in places like Stockholm, Amsterdam, Paris, and London.. There are lots of national IX's, further enhancing the standard. So what's the problem? Basically, one organisation, Ebone, which operates a fairly large pan-European net, won't peer with others. This means that European customers connected to non-Ebone connected providers like Global One lack European connectivity without going through the US. Ebone provides great connectivity at cost, but the big US NSPs making presences in Europe naturally don't want to buy bandwidth from someone like Ebone. We'll see what happens. - Jakob Faarvang cybernet.dk - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations, (continued)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jeremy Porter (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Alex.Bligh (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Todd Graham Lewis (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations alex (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jeremy Porter (Oct 26)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations alex (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jakob Faarvang (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Michael Dillon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations bmanning (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Matt Ranney (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Robert E. Seastrom (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Charging content providers less? Bradley Dunn (Oct 25)
- Re: Charging content providers less? Jim Dixon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Michael Dillon (Oct 25)
- Re: Provider credibility - does it matter? was Re: Inter-provider relations Jim Dixon (Oct 25)