> What I would like more than anything right now is some official word from
> high-up's at BBN regarding what this policy entails exactly, and what
> their rationale is behind it.
>
Based on just that little slice of the conversation, is BBN doing what
UUnet apparently failed in _it's_ attempt to do last fall, to Jack
Rickard's (and my) vast amusement?
Now it all fits in to something I didn't quite understand 2 weeks ago. I
consult for a university network planning the purchase of a T3 to the
Chicago NAP for access to StarTap and Internet-2. Part of the cost
planning is finding Internet-1 access via an ATM VC of 8Mb. I sent around
to a number of major ISPs at the Chicago NAP asking to *pay* for full
peering at the Chicago NAP via an 8Mb VC. A number of them came back with
good answers. But BBN's sales droids indicated very clearly that they
will not peer with me unless I purchase the line into the NAP from them:
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 11:34:33 -0500
Organization: GTE InternetworkingWe will allow the peering if you get the lines from us. So if you order the
T3 through GTE Internetworking, you can peer with us at a NAP. Where are
you getting the T3 from now?From: Hank Nussbacher [SMTP:hank@ibm.net.il]
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 1998 1:25 PM
To: xxxxx
Subject: RE: T3sEven to pay you won't allow a university to peer with you at a NAP?!
-HankHank, we only do private peering with telco companies. The only way to
do the peering you want to do with us is to order the T3 through us.
Needless to say, they are now off my short list. Tis a shame though. The
BBN NOC is by far the most responsive I have seen. When sending our Smurf
complaints to UUnet, MCI, Sprint, BBN, etc., I will usually get 5 responses
in 24 hours from their NOC (different people). The others just send an
automated trouble ticket and I never hear from them again.
Hank