Editing Peering (section)

== History ==
The first Internet exchange point was the [[Commercial Internet eXchange]] (CIX), formed by [[AlterNet|Alternet]]/[[UUNET]] (now [[Verizon Business]]), [[PSINet|PSI]], and [[CERFnet|CERFNET]] to exchange traffic without regard for whether the traffic complied with the [[acceptable use policy]] (AUP) of the [[NSFNet]] or ANS' interconnection policy.<ref>{{cite web| url = http://www.cybertelecom.org/notes/internet_history90s.htm#cix| title= Internet History :: Era of Disruption & Competition: CIX|website=Cybertelecom, Federal Internet Law & Policy|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210612223315/https://cybertelecom.org/notes/internet_history90s.htm|archive-date=12 June 2021|access-date=30 March 2022}}</ref> The CIX infrastructure consisted of a single router, managed by PSI, and was initially located in [[Santa Clara County, California|Santa Clara]], California. Paying CIX members were allowed to attach to the router directly or via leased lines. After some time, the router was also attached to the Pacific Bell SMDS cloud. The router was later moved to the [[Palo Alto Internet Exchange]], or PAIX, which was developed and operated by [[Digital Equipment Corporation]] (DEC). Because the CIX operated at [[OSI protocols#Layer 3: network layer|OSI layer 3]], rather than [[OSI protocols#Layer 2: data link layer|OSI layer 2]], and because it was not neutral, in the sense that it was operated by one of its participants rather than by all of them collectively, and it conducted lobbying activities supported by some of its participants and not by others, it would not today be considered an Internet exchange point. Nonetheless, it was the first thing to bear that name.

The first exchange point to resemble modern, neutral, Ethernet-based exchanges was the [[MAE-East|Metropolitan Area Ethernet]], or MAE, in [[Tysons Corner]], [[Virginia]]. When the United States government de-funded the [[NSFNET]] backbone, Internet exchange points were needed to replace its function, and initial governmental funding was used to aid the preexisting MAE and bootstrap three other exchanges, which they dubbed NAPs, or "[[Network access point|Network Access Points]]," in accordance with the terminology of the National Information Infrastructure document.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Ford|first=Peter|author2=Aiken, B. |author3=Braun, H.W. |title=NSF implementation plan for interim NREN|journal=Journal on High Speed Networking, 1993|date=February 2004|url=http://www.caida.org/publications/papers/1993/nipin/}}</ref> All four are now defunct or no longer functioning as Internet exchange points:

*MAE-East – Located in [[Tysons Corner]], Virginia, and later relocated to [[Ashburn, Virginia]]
*Chicago NAP – Operated by [[Ameritech]] and located in [[Chicago]], Illinois
*New York NAP – Operated by [[Sprint Corporation|Sprint]] and located in [[Pennsauken Township, New Jersey|Pennsauken]], New Jersey
*San Francisco NAP – Operated by [[Pacific Bell|PacBell]] and located in the Bay Area

As the Internet grew, and traffic levels increased, these NAPs became a [[Network congestion|network bottleneck]]. Most of the early NAPs utilized [[FDDI]] technology, which provided only 100 [[Megabit per second|Mbit/s]] of capacity to each participant. Some of these exchanges upgraded to [[Asynchronous Transfer Mode|ATM]] technology, which provided [[OC-3]] (155&nbsp;Mbit/s) and [[OC-12]] (622&nbsp;Mbit/s) of capacity.

Other prospective exchange point operators moved directly into offering Ethernet technology, such as [[gigabit Ethernet]] (1,000&nbsp;Mbit/s), which quickly became the predominant choice for Internet exchange points due to the reduced cost and increased capacity offered. Today, almost all significant exchange points operate solely over Ethernet, and most of the largest exchange points offer 10, 40, and even [[100 Gigabit Ethernet|100 gigabit]] service.

During the [[Dot-com bubble|dot-com boom]], many exchange point and carrier-neutral colocation providers had plans to build as many as 50 locations to promote carrier interconnection in the [[United States]] alone. Essentially all of these plans were abandoned following the [[Dot-com bubble|dot-com bust]], and today it is considered both economically and technically infeasible to support this level of interconnection among even the largest of networks.