[86596] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Peering VLANs and MAC addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Patrick W. Gilmore)
Fri Nov 11 09:40:49 2005
In-Reply-To: <17268.43940.950488.829066@roam.psg.com>
Cc: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 09:40:14 -0500
To: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Nov 11, 2005, at 9:33 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> Who said "big carriers" don't join IXes? There are plenty of
>> networks who have more traffic than some "teir ones" at IXes.
>> Hell, RANDY has a presence at least one IX.
>
> well, one of my routers does :-) and it moves almost 50kb/sec!
:-)
> i have spent <long enough i don't want to count> years trying to
> get large isps to peer openly (originally pushed by asp). the
> costs of managing in the presence of bad behavior on public meshes
> is often used as a reason not to peer publicly.
Touch=E9.
No one is claiming that Bad Stuff does not happen. However, NAPs =20
these days are stable, scalable, and useful. Picking your peers =20
carefully - which is a requirement for public or private peering - =20
helps.
We are just saying that "grown-ups" _DO_ use public IXes. (Plus =20
people like me. :) And anyone who claims that IXes are bad places to =20=
trade traffic are ... not being very grown up.
--=20
TTFN,
patrick=
