[54606] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: US-Asia Peering
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Fri Jan 10 02:04:15 2003
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com>
Date: 10 Jan 2003 07:03:34 +0000
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030109202848.02875780@postoffice.pacbell.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
what a morass of confusion. on the one hand we have a metro peering fabric,
which as linx, exchangepoint, paix, and lots of others have shown, is good.
on another hand we have a metro peering fabric, which as mfs and ames showed,
can be really bad. because we have a lot of hands we also have exchange-level
peering, which as paix and six has shown, can be done safely. there's also
a hand containing multiple instances of exchange level peering which was not
done safely (and i'm not double counting ames and mfs here.) finally we have
intermetro (wide area) peering, which has been shown to be a complete joke
for peering for any number of reasons.
before any of you argue further, please carefully define your terminology so
the rest of us will know how to fill out our scorecards.
--
Paul Vixie
