[137801] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Internet Exchange Point(IXP) questions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Martin Pels)
Sat Feb 19 13:27:07 2011
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 19:26:15 +0100
From: Martin Pels <martin.pels@ams-ix.net>
To: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>
In-Reply-To: <20110218214456.GA72337@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>,
"Yaoqing\(Joey\) Liu" <joey.liuyq@gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:44:56 -0800
Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org> wrote:
> In a message written on Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 04:36:28PM -0500,
> Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > leaking the IX prefix to customers, to me, seems like a recipe for
> > much wider/unintended leakage :(
>
> Oh, it is. I remember when MAE-EAST was injected by at least 50
> people into the DFZ because back then people weren't careful enough
> to just send such things to customers.
>
> AMS-IX (and others) have the better solution. They have AS1200,
> announce the exchange LAN from AS1200 (195.69.144.0/22). They will
> peer with you if you are at the exchange, see
> http://www.ams-ix.net/as1200-peering/. I believe, but can't find
> a reference really quick that they get transit for it from a couple
> of providers so those that don't peer still have the route.
We advertise 195.69.144.0/22 with no-export.
Kind regards,
Martin
