[150406] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IX in France
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (virendra rode)
Thu Feb 23 12:40:23 2012
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 09:39:19 -0800
From: virendra rode <virendra.rode@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <7A848D4888ADA94B8A46A17296740133B38D4AE3E2@DEXTER.oasis-tech.local>
Reply-To: virendra.rode@gmail.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Brings up another question to mind, how many of you have peered using
partial route transit versus having direct peering relationship at the
exchange?
I've personally ran into companies during peering meetings wanting to
sell you their peering relationship (access to their routes that they've
earned through their relationship) as opposed to you wanting to
establish direct peering relationship.
This way you don't bare port fees, no colocation cost, cost of IX
membership, etc.
I understand this is not true peering relationship, however its an
interesting way to obtain exchange point routes and I understand this is
nothing new.
Just interested in learning about your experiences.
regards,
/virendra
On 02/21/2012 08:46 AM, Ido Szargel wrote:
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> We are currently looking to connect to one of the IX's available in Paris,
>
> It seems that there are 2 "major" players - FranceIX and Equinix FR, can
> anyone share their opinions about those?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ido
>
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iF4EAREIAAYFAk9GeccACgkQ3HuimOHfh+GcBAD8CBJ6Of8ciFMr4ufim8+u7Hpg
cWLXuuqNkgIeQa+jr1gA/27Bqck+d/LEXeoPNJQExUjXMoQC7sNXoPOIHlfrrKF0
=7jTr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
