[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ih] Origination date for the Internet

On Oct 29, 2010, at 2:38 PM, Randy Bush wrote:

>> Did the CIX pioneers not realize, at the outset, that using a router
>> as an interconnect would make things odd in an (ahem) dynamically
>> evolving business environment?
> there was what was characterized by some as a religious discussion.
> some just thought it was router envy.  other that everything looked like
> a nail.  but this was pretty early, so give 'em a break.

As a practical matter, at the time it was pretty obvious how to order
a T-1 circuit between the CIX router and your router and plug the two
router interfaces together.  It wasn't nearly as obvious how to do
that with an L2 switch at the time, with the stuff you already had
deployed in your network.  The later L2/Ethernet exchanges initially
required you to colocate your router next to the switch (be it
Ethernet, FDDI, whatever).  It was later before MFS figured out
how to extend the ethernet hose to your premise over their metro
ethernet service.
> but the cix was as much a political/business act than a long term
> scalable exchange point.  as louie says, mae east was for real (except
> for those damned datakits!).

I recall these were some sort of ADC box connected in a ring configuration
with DS3 circuits, or something. 

> the jokes were the nsf-sponsored 'naps', like the ans monopoly none of
> which survived.  of the nsf dump and run, little was actually viable,
> sprintlink being the notable exception, thanks steve goldstein, dima
> volodin, ...

The "Washington NAP" mostly just was an extension of MAE-EAST, and largely
duplicative.  The Sprint NAP in NY was incrementally new in capability
and location, though I'm trying to recall if UUNET eventually connected
to it or not; private bilateral peering was starting to take off by

Louis Mamakos