nanog mailing list archives
Re: US-Asia Peering
From: Stephen Stuart <stuart () tech org>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 20:37:40 -0800
Well, first I think we need to agree that there are two different cases here: 1) interconnecting IXes operated by the same party, vs. 2) interconnecting IXes operated by different parties.
PAIX has successful implementations of both of these (I count our metro strategy as an instance of the first sort, and our varied interconnections to other switch fabrics operated by other people as an instance of the second). With both, as I stated earlier, a thorough understanding of the shortcomings of L2 fabrics as a place for different parties to meet is crucial to avoiding service-affecting outages. The lessons learned along the way are very helpful in debugging quickly and thoroughly when a service-affecting outage creeps through. Stephen VP, Eng. PAIX
Current thread:
- Re: US-Asia Peering, (continued)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Joe Provo (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen Stuart (Jan 03)
- Re: US-Asia Peering William B. Norton (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Bill Woodcock (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen J. Wilcox (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Randy Bush (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering William B. Norton (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Randy Bush (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering William B. Norton (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Paul Vixie (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen Stuart (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Bill Woodcock (Jan 09)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Neil J. McRae (Jan 10)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen J. Wilcox (Jan 10)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Bill Woodcock (Jan 10)
- Re: US-Asia Peering William B. Norton (Jan 10)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen J. Wilcox (Jan 11)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Paul Vixie (Jan 11)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Stephen J. Wilcox (Jan 11)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Paul Vixie (Jan 11)
- Re: US-Asia Peering Kurt Erik Lindqvist (Jan 12)