[118876] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Peering in Latin America
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jorge Amodio)
Sun Nov 1 12:43:34 2009
In-Reply-To: <5b6f80200910312130r25fd63a2sa62aa58663cf65dc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 12:42:46 -0500
From: Jorge Amodio <jmamodio@gmail.com>
To: Ken Gilmour <ken.gilmour@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
You are still confusing peering and transit with ability to announce
your IP prefix via BGP.
It may be very useful to others willing to help, if you provide a
better detail of what
kind of recipe you want to cook instead of asking where you can find
the individual
ingredients.
Regards
Jorge
On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 11:30 PM, Ken Gilmour <ken.gilmour@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/10/31 Seth Mattinen <sethm@rollernet.us>:
>> Ken Gilmour wrote:
>>>
>>> We have BGP4 networks in other locations (IPv4 and IPv6) - Costa Rica
>>> being one of the places that don't have it... We would really like to
>>> be able to implement it here but are finding it difficult to find SPs
>>> who support Customers who advertise their own PI space.
>>>
>>
>> It doesn't sound like you want peering - specifically AT&T's answer
>> implies they think you want settlement-free peering when you just want
>> to announce your routes via BGP (aka paid transit).
>>
>> ~Seth
>>
>>
>
> Yes - Sorry my initial approach to NANOG was not very specific!
> However my approach to the SPs was very specific (and ADN understood
> exactly what I wanted when I first approached them and are working on
> a quote)... I specifically asked how we would go about getting a
> second point-to-point link and peer with them over that link (and for
> existing providers such as ICE and RACSA) how we could upgrade our
> current contract to allow us to announce our own PI space... I am not
> sure how I could be any more specific than that...
>
> Ken
>
>
