nanog mailing list archives

Re: Carrier classification

From: Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 13 May 2017 15:52:38 +0000

On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 8:45 AM Matt Hoppes <
mattlists () rivervalleyinternet net> wrote:

Are the terms tier-1,2,3 dead terms or still valid ways to define carriers?


Yes, pretty much dead.

There are networks that meet your price / performance, and those that
don't.

Current thread:

Carrier classification Matt Hoppes (May 13)
- Re: Carrier classification Ca By (May 13)
  - Re: Carrier classification Matt Hoppes (May 13)
    - Re: Carrier classification Mark Tinka (May 14)
- Re: Carrier classification Mike Hammett (May 13)
  - Re: Carrier classification Ca By (May 13)
  - Re: Carrier classification Mark Tinka (May 14)
    - Re: Carrier classification Bradley Huffaker (May 15)
    - Re: Carrier classification Ca By (May 15)
    - Re: Carrier classification Large Hadron Collider (May 15)
    - Re: Carrier classification Ken Chase (May 15)
    - Re: Carrier classification joel jaeggli (May 15)

(Thread continues...)