nanog mailing list archives
Re: Comments
From: Peter Dawe <peter () unipalm co uk>
Date: Fri, 02 Sep 94 12:47:26 +0100 (BST)
Milo S. Medin wrote ...
Cheap, low speed connections to the NAP - We got squeezed by product
availability here. We know that there is a bigger market in selling T
1 speed
connections to the NAPs than T3 and above. However, we had a requirem
ent to
support multiple T3's initially (remember that the minimum purpose of
the
NAPs is to support the existing NSFNET backbone for transition purpose
s, the
NSPs who are providing access to RNP's and who have a requirement to c
onnect to
all of the priority NAPs, and the vBNS). FDDI and SMDS weren't going
to survive
for long under this type of load, but ATM doesn't yet have T1 capabili
ty
(although it's coming). So, we proposed ATM, starting at 45 and 155 M
b/s
initially, and extending to 1.5 Mb/s and 622 Mb/s as switching equipme
nt
becomes available. Believe me, we'll be offering T1 speed connections
to
the SF and Chicago NAPs just as soon as we can make it work.
Why offer T1 connections? The primary goal of the NAP's in the first
phase of the transition is to support the replacement of 1 core NSP with
a few NSP's with minimum disruption. THIS is what should be optimized
for. Are you confident that all the management procedures and technologies
we are deploying will support a gob of T1 NAP attached AS's? This is highly
questionable in my mind, esp. with PVC's that have to be configured by hand.
I knew the truth about NAPS would come out.
The idea is to squeeze out the small US players and force them to
pay the DS3 capable telcos for their access.
Is this anti-competative or what!
I'm glad I don't operate in the US
-----------------------MIME Messages Accepted----------------------
Peter Dawe, Director, Unipalm plc, Email: peter () unipalm co uk
Managing Director, PIPEX Ltd Voice: +44(0)1223 250100
216 The Science Park, Milton Road Fax: +44(0)1223 250101
Cambridge, England, CB4 4WA WWW: http://www.pipex.net
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Government Regulation?
The minimum needed to maintain an open and free market for all!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Comments, (continued)
- Re: Comments Steve Schnell, Sprint Corporation (Sep 01)
- Re: Comments Dave Sincoskie (Sep 01)
- Re: Comments Curtis Villamizar (Sep 01)
- Re: Comments Stephen Wolff (Sep 01)
- Re: Comments Martin Lee Schoffstall (Sep 01)
- Re: Comments Stephen Wolff (Sep 01)
- Re: Comments Curtis Villamizar (Sep 01)
- Re: Comments Milo S. Medin (Sep 01)
- Re: Comments Matt Mathis (Sep 02)
- Re: Comments Curtis Villamizar (Sep 02)
- Comments Tony Li (Sep 02)
- Re: Comments Peter Dawe (Sep 02)
- Re: Comments bmanning (Sep 02)
- Re: Comments Milo S. Medin (Sep 02)
- Re: Comments Peter Dawe (Sep 05)
- Re: Comments Gordon Cook (Sep 05)
- Re: Comments Peter Dawe (Sep 06)
- Re: Comments Stephen Wolff (Sep 07)
- Re: Comments Peter Dawe (Sep 07)
- Re: Comments Stephen Wolff (Sep 07)
- Re: Comments Gordon Cook (Sep 07)
- Re: Comments Peter S. Ford (Sep 07)
