[187311] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Peering Exchange
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Colton Conor)
Tue Jan 26 20:00:57 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAOb1_VOrYzV9fxPFvd1T2aeVMFkzo9c2aQ7Q6kmTEFG-_+1w0w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 19:00:48 -0600
From: Colton Conor <colton.conor@gmail.com>
To: Bryan Socha <bryan@digitalocean.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Someone actually sent me a list from Equinix. If it says MLPE next to the
IP address of the provider then I assume they are using the MLPE route
server, and if not I assume you have to reach out to peer with them. Does
that sound accurate?
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Bryan Socha <bryan@digitalocean.com> wrote:
> Check out nl nog's the ring (they have a looking glass), routeviews or
> ripe's RIS project (bgplay) being an interface to the data). You should
> be able to find someone sending up bgp data to these projects that include
> the route servers on different IX points.
>
>
> Bryan Socha
> Network Engineer
> DigitalOcean
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Colton Conor <colton.conor@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Is there a way to browse a route server at certain exchanges, and see who
>> is and is not on the route server?
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Hugo Slabbert <hugo@slabnet.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue 2016-Jan-26 13:30:41 -0600, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Google or Facebook are exactly who you would want to connect with and
>> I'm
>> >> fairly sure they're on the route servers.
>> >>
>> >
>> > ...and have open peering policies with pretty low requirements.
>> >
>> > https://peering.google.com/about/peering_policy.html
>> > https://www.facebook.com/peering/
>> >
>> > Gist:
>> >
>> > Google (in NA and EU) asks for >100 mbps peak for bilateral peering, but
>> > are on route servers where present and are happy to dish out & pick up
>> > routes that way for anyone not pushing enough bits for direct sessions.
>> >
>> > Facebook wants >50 mbps peak for bilateral peering, though I don't see
>> > them on route servers at e.g. the SIX.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Hugo
>> >
>> > hugo@slabnet.com: email, xmpp/jabber
>> > PGP fingerprint (B178313E):
>> > CF18 15FA 9FE4 0CD1 2319 1D77 9AB1 0FFD B178 313E
>> >
>> > (also on Signal)
>> >
>> >
>> > Other than driving additional revenue by needing to buy ports to both or
>> >> possible regulatory concerns, I'm not sure why these companies spin up
>> an
>> >> exchange for every new fad that comes along. They all just boil down
>> to an
>> >> Ethernet fabric.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -----
>> >> Mike Hammett
>> >> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> >> http://www.ics-il.com
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>
>
