RE: Airplane crashing into Atlanta-NAP

> Now that I've thrown in my share of late night sarcasm, It would interest
> me greatly to understand exactly why you came to the following
> conclusions:
> 1. The "operation" in Atlanta is Mickey Mouse

Both the Internet and the POTS system are telecommunications networks that
are vital to the modern economy. POTS moreso than the Internet right now
but the Internet is certainly heading in that direction. POTS exchanges
are always in ground floor concrete buildings with no windows or
underground. But in Atlanta they stick it up on the 5th floor of some
office building?!?!?!?

I do not know where you get your data, but you are wrong. Many POTS exchanges
in California, and many other parts of the country are not on the ground floor,
or in basements. In fact, several of the POTS exchanges in San Francisco are
on multiple floors of the same building.

> 2. The floor # of a bulding affects the quality of the Exchange Point
> 3. The type of building affect the quality of the Exchange Point

I cannot explain these ones but have reached this conclusion from
observing how the phone company builds and locates its exchanges.

Must be specific to your phone company or an incomplete perspective
of phone company methods.

The primary reason for telephone exchanges of the past being built on
ground floors and basements was the weight of the equipment and the
difficulty of moving it. In modern times, the weight of the batteries
still plays a role, but exchanges are being remoted away from the batteries
with increasing regularity.

> 4. A city the size of Atlanta needs more than 1 Exchange Point

It has a lot more than one POTS exchange. Thus it will need more than
1 Internet exchange. Why should the packets from every video-call in the
city all travel downtown when frequently the two parties live in the same

An interesting theory, but the Internet does not route information the same
way the telephone system does. For one thing, you are comparing a connection
oriented network to a connectionless network. There are subustantial differences.

> Truly I would be very interested in your thoughts on these items, as
> well may a few other folks on this list.

I'm taking a long term view in which ISP's are just another form of
telephone company. Many ISP's are now getting to the size where they can
consider aquiring strategically located properties, building concrete
block exchange/colo buildings, wiring up entire office towers with
IP fiber and even running their own fibre in some case, especially in new

ISP's will never be another form of telephone company. ISP's who are viewing
their role that way will not last long in the future. Even telephone companies
will not maintain that role for very many years to come. You are trying to
take a technology of the future and apply it to an obsolete model.

By today's standards Atlanta-NAP may be a really great thing, but too soon
we will discover that we aren't living in "today" any more and the
standards will be different.

Yes, they will, but I don't think they will go back to the Telco of the

Michael Dillon - ISP & Internet Consulting
Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-604-546-3049 - E-mail: