[106783] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Coop Peering Fabric??
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Tue Aug 12 22:52:21 2008
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
To: NANOG list <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <620fd17c0808121348w4529bb0m9a7704dbdf095827@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2008 22:52:07 -0400
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Aug 12, 2008, at 4:48 PM, Paul Wall wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore
> <patrick@ianai.net> wrote:
>> Tons of others exist, in big and little markets. There's one in
>> 365 Main
>> SF, there's KleyReX in the same building as DE-CIX, Big APE in 111
>> 8th, NYCx
>> there too, ChicagoIX just opened, etc., etc.
>
> Excellent point on Europe.
>
> Not so much in the United States. Do SFMIX, BIG APE, NYCX, etc 1)
> have more than a half dozen participants 2) exchange any traffic other
> than BGP keep-alives and ARP? :) I think not. When you look at why
> not, it's usually always predatory practices on the part of various
> collo and IX operators preventing widespread adoptation. If CHIX were
> doing real traffic, do you think Equinix would allow them to remain
> accessible from their suites, and in a cost-effective manner?
I'm guessing the answer to 1 & 2 is yes. Proof of at least
participant count: <http://www.ny6ix.net/>.
>> Trust me, it _is_ being done.
>
> It's being done, just not on a large scale in the United States
> outside of the SIX.
Define "large". For instance, Atlanta IX had more traffic than PAIX
in the same building last I checked.
And how large does it need to be to save a network $300/month?
--
TTFN,
patrick
