[132583] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: experience with equinix exchange
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Mon Nov 29 16:03:30 2010
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
In-Reply-To: <8FD96137-144C-46D8-BAFC-EBEBED143DCB@pch.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 16:03:21 -0500
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Nov 29, 2010, at 2:54 PM, Bill Woodcock wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 04:09:55PM -0600, Aaron Wendel wrote:
>>> According to pch they don't run most of them. I would say they run=20=
>>> very few compared to how many there actually are.
>>=20
>> Uhh... Reality check, with the S&D acquisition Equinix controls the =
VAST=20
>> majority of the IX traffic in the US. The only other IX's doing =
anything=20
>> even approaching interesting traffic are NOTA (in Miami), NYIIX (in =
New=20
>> York), SIX (in Seattle), and the former AtlantaIX (now Telx TIE) in=20=
>> Atlanta. All are regional players, with very incomplete coverage of =
the=20
>> important regions in the US, so if you're peering in the US you're=20
>> almost guaranteed to be dealing with Equinix.=20
>=20
> I might not state things quite as strongly as RAS, but yes, in =
essence, that's how things stand. There's a very long tail to the IXP =
curve, but nearly all of the traffic volume in North America is going =
through Equinix-operated facilities, at this point. RAS has mentioned =
the main other ones, and I'd probably only add Toronto and CoreSite to =
the list.
The only thing I would change is that Any2 has at least one exchange =
with traffic (Los Angeles) and is distributed throughout the country.
But the vast majority of traffic exchange over IXes in the US is over =
Equinix/PAIX switches. And a very large amount of traffic over private =
interconnects is also done in their buildings.
--=20
TTFN,
patrick
