[165152] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jacques Latour)
Wed Aug 21 08:38:06 2013
From: Jacques Latour <jacques.latour@cira.ca>
To: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net>, North American Network Operators' Group
<nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:43:44 -0400
In-Reply-To: <83227146-C0F2-430F-A7B9-970E96480D9C@pch.net>
Cc: Allan MacGillivray <allan.macgillivray@cira.ca>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
The main reason we are collecting feedback for Vancouver is that both VANTX=
and PIX are not member based IXP organizations, VANTX is owned and operate=
d by BCnet, a R&E organization, and PIX is owned and operated by Peer1.
We heard from a few people in Vancouver that they would like to have a true=
open, neutral and member based IXP, the idea for the town hall meeting is =
to build the community around a Vancouver IXP. BCnet has a good story to t=
ell about VANTX, community support and IXPs across the province.
If you care about Vancouver, then let us know. I'll see what I can do abou=
t the poutine :-)
________________________________________
From: Bill Woodcock [woody@pch.net]
Sent: August 20, 2013 11:14 PM
To: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet
On Aug 20, 2013, at 8:02 PM, Christopher Morrell <christopher.morrell.nanog=
@gmail.com> wrote:
> In Winnipeg, isn't there also the WPGIX? Do you have two competing IXPs i=
n Winnipeg?
There are nominally competing efforts in Winnipeg (MBIX and WPGIX), Calgary=
(YYCIX and AlbertaIX), Montreal (QIX and Peer1), Vancouver (BCIX and Peer1=
), and even Toronto (TorIX, Peer1, CANIX, and IIX).
I would not characterize more than one of those in each city as a going con=
cern, however.
https://pch.net/ixpdir
-Bill=
