nanog mailing list archives
Re: UUNET settlement - A call to arms?
From: Eric Sobocinski <sobo () merit edu>
Date: Fri, 02 May 1997 18:39:15 -0400
On Fri, 2 May 1997 at 15:17 PDT, Mike Leber <mleber () he net> wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 1997, Bownes, Robert M. (EXCH) wrote:What I would like to do is to connect to, for example, Sprint *just to get to folks who buy from Sprint*, not to transit through them to get to a NAP someplace.You can already do this. Simply buy a T1 from Sprint and filter out all of the non Sprint routes. Where you might have normally purchased 10 Mbps transit service, you can now use just a T1 with the appropriate filters. It will become a pain to load balance and capacity plan all of those little pipes (increased expense and complexity), but hey, if you don't want to or can't use an exchange point this is an alternative.
Uh, no, but thank you for playing. It's the other direction that is the problem. How does he advertise routes to Sprint so that Sprint customers can reach him but without Sprint advertising his routes at exchange points? That's the other half of what he's asking for, and he can't do it unless Sprint sets up filters to do it for him. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- UUNET settlement - A call to arms? James Saker (May 02)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: UUNET settlement - A call to arms? Bownes, Robert M. (EXCH) (May 02)
- RE: UUNET settlement - A call to arms? Mike Leber (May 02)
- Re: UUNET settlement - A call to arms? Karl Mueller (May 02)
- Re: UUNET settlement - A call to arms? Deepak Jain (May 02)
- Re: UUNET settlement - A call to arms? Charles F. Crizer Jr. (May 02)
- RE: UUNET settlement - A call to arms? Mike Leber (May 02)
- Re: UUNET settlement - A call to arms? Jeff Young (May 04)