nanog mailing list archives
Re: inter-NOC communications (was:Re: Definition of Congestion)
From: Paul Vixie <vixie () mibh net>
Date: 31 Jan 2000 15:45:39 -0800
doleary () juniper net ("dave o'leary") writes:
Attempts to "standardize" inter-NOC communication happened a couple of times in the early 90's in the IETF, but it got too ugly, with too many barriers (basically people not wanting to expose dirty laundry). I fear that attempts to do so now when the providers are *really* competing with each other (as opposed to back in the old daze when we were all friends :-) will suffer the same fate, other than on a pairwise basis between NOCs that cooperate well with each other anyway.
as in, "i'm sorry, but there's no word for ``outage'' in our language." (feh.) -- Paul Vixie <vixie () mibh net> SVP for Internet Services, MFNX M.I.B.H. Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Metromedia Fiber Network, Inc.
Current thread:
- Definition of Congestion Sean Donelan (Jan 30)
- Re: Definition of Congestion Sean Butler (Jan 30)
- Re: Definition of Congestion Sam Thomas (Jan 30)
- Re: Definition of Congestion Henry R. Linneweh (Jan 30)
- inter-NOC communications (was:Re: Definition of Congestion) dave o'leary (Jan 31)
- Re: inter-NOC communications (was:Re: Definition of Congestion) J.D. Falk (Jan 31)
- Re: inter-NOC communications (was:Re: Definition of Congestion) Paul Vixie (Jan 31)
- Re: inter-NOC communications (was:Re: Definition of Congestion) Steve Meuse (Jan 31)
- Re: inter-NOC communications (was:Re: Definition of Congestion) Deepak Jain (Jan 31)