nanog mailing list archives
Re: US-Asia Peering
From: Joe Provo <nanog-post () rsuc gweep net>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 15:02:29 -0500
I find the interesting that there were immediate assumptions by all the followup posters that the hypothectical mesh wbn suggested would be run by an exchange point operator. Perhaps no public statements were sent by anyone in using similar trans-atlantic services (that are not run by the affected EP operator[s]). It isn't a new solution, and there isn't only one company offering the service. I think exploring any technical issues/experiences in the differing existing deploys and how they would relate to a trans- pacific deploy is quite worthwhile. If anyone using one of the trans-atlantic services wanted to send comments but didn't have enough desire to get a throwaway account subscribed to nanog-post, I'll happily anonomize and repost for you. Just no guarentees on timliness. Cheers, Joe
Current thread:
- US-Asia Peering William B. Norton (Jan 02)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen Stuart (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Jeff Barrows (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering David Diaz (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Jared Mauch (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Bill Woodcock (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Joe Provo (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen Stuart (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Jeff Barrows (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering William B. Norton (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Bill Woodcock (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen J. Wilcox (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Randy Bush (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering William B. Norton (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Randy Bush (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering William B. Norton (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Paul Vixie (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen Stuart (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen Stuart (Jan 09)