[54680] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: US-Asia Peering
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Mon Jan 13 02:58:52 2003
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com>
Date: 13 Jan 2003 07:58:20 +0000
In-Reply-To: <A0A4A736-2669-11D7-A551-000393AB1404@kurtis.pp.se>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
kurtis@kurtis.pp.se (Kurt Erik Lindqvist) writes:
> Bill,
>
> How do you see the failed AMS-IX expansion fit into this?
>
> My (very simplified) summary of what happened was that :
> ...
> At the time of the origin of the discussion I was peering co-ordinator at
> KPNQwest, and would have pulled-out of AMS-IX if the plans (and KQ..:) )
> would have moved on.
well of course i'm not bill, but (naturally) i will comment anyway. was
AMS-IX planning to expand beyond its original metro and bridge all the XP
switches together? if so then i understand exactly why KQ and other ISP's
would have pulled out of AMS-IX in protest (and in fear). however, if the
expansion was intra-metro, then i must be confused, because KQ's major
source of bandwidth revenue should have been inter-metro not intra-metro.
--
Paul Vixie
