[102475] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Will Hargrave)
Sat Feb 16 10:52:34 2008
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:45:20 -0800
From: Will Hargrave <will@lonap.net>
CC: nanog list <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <7AB729D6-3982-4FBB-9CAC-2A69A79951C1@grrrrreg.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Greg VILLAIN wrote:
> I'm not saying one should convert every single IX peering into a PNI, as
> I feel both are pretty much required: your smallest peers shall be
> secured on as many IXes as possible, your biggest ones via PNI. IX
> peering is mandatory to keep internet routing diversity up to par - and
> enable small ASes to grow.
The converse can also be true - we have a number of members who use the
IX fabric as a backup to their PIs with larger peering partners. If you
lose a PI carrying a GE of traffic, where does that traffic go?
--
Will Hargrave will@lonap.net
Technical Director
LONAP Ltd
