nanog mailing list archives
Re: Agenda for next NANOG
From: Avi Freedman <freedman () netaxs com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 09:41:12 -0400 (EDT)
Looking at it strictly from a technical level, there is little difference between a private interconnect and the connection between an ISP and their upstream provider if they have one. (we might consider debating this assumption especially in terms of scale :-))Actually, the traditional point2point link between any two ISPs is a private interconnect. It does not have to be a provider/subscriber relationship. --bill
Except for what one does to/with the routes learned via the BGP session involved in such an interconnect... With a "private interconnect" between "peers" one does not redistribute routes heard from one peer to another; with a "upstream" - "downstream" relationship, one does redistribute routes hears from one peer to another, thus giving the "downstream" transit to those other peers. I'm clarifying for others; I know you understand the difference :) Avi - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Guy T Almes (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Randy Bush (Sep 03)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Guy T Almes (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Sean Doran (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG John Hawkinson (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Curtis Villamizar (Sep 03)
- RE: Agenda for next NANOG Peter Ford (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG bmanning (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG John Hawkinson (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Avi Freedman (Sep 04)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG bmanning (Sep 03)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Craig Labovitz (Sep 04)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Curtis Villamizar (Sep 04)
- Re: Agenda for next NANOG Brett D. Watson (Sep 05)
