North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: MCI and SprintLink are partitioned (fwd)

  • From: Hans-Werner Braun
  • Date: Wed Oct 04 13:10:01 1995

>>  . are all three (four?) NAPs really being used 
>	Yes.  for some value of "used".

That answer is close to meaningless. Please give me your metric.

>>  . Is there any evidence that the NAPs are really backing each other
>>    up? 
>	Not sure this is possible.  Perhaps the better question is,
>	are providers using the NAPs to back each other up.

Let me rephrase. How is the NSF programmatic goal being met of creating
three NAPs for redundancy purposes to avoid compartmentalization of
the U.S. R&E portion of the Internet, and how is that being verified?

>>  . do we have some regular examples from *any* site A initiating a
>>    connection from A to B, A to C, and A to D, where the three are
>>    verifiably (via traceroute, I guess) would traverse different NAPs
>>    (and hopefully only one each)?
>	Yes.

So, where are they? Say, can you give me two examples for such an
A-B/C/D scenario? One from SDSC, one from NSF. Your answers are a bit
too flippant to me. Sorry.

>>  . Are there routing stability reports accessible online from the RA
>>    (or whoever else feels responsible for this) that graph fluctuations
>>    at the NAPs, including correlation among them? What are the quality
>>    metrics for routing stability?
>	Being defined.

To be publicly discussed, finished, and available by ...?

>>  . Do all the NAPs provide online statistics?
>	No.

Why not? Will that change? My understanding is that the NAP service
providers have contractual obligations for some statistics. I know there
is disagreement about what stats are appropriate, but is not there a
contractual requirement for at least some baseline?

>>  . Are the NAP and RA regular reports to NSF publicly (hopefully via
>>    the Web) available?
>  have the annual report/plan papers

Are there any more reporting requirements (quarterly? Monthly?).
Waiting a year per report in such a changing environment strikes me as
a bit long.

If I wanted a comprehensive snapshot of the current state of the
NAP-union, where/how would I get it.

>>  . Is there any way NANOG can be used to exchange status information
>>    accessible via the network. Is someone already working on that?
>>    Would not NANOG be *the* forum to cooperate on that?
>	Sounds like a really good idea to me.