nanog mailing list archives
Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points
From: Will Hargrave <will () lonap net>
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:45:20 -0800
Greg VILLAIN wrote:
I'm not saying one should convert every single IX peering into a PNI, as I feel both are pretty much required: your smallest peers shall be secured on as many IXes as possible, your biggest ones via PNI. IX peering is mandatory to keep internet routing diversity up to par - and enable small ASes to grow.
The converse can also be true - we have a number of members who use the IX fabric as a backup to their PIs with larger peering partners. If you lose a PI carrying a GE of traffic, where does that traffic go? -- Will Hargrave will () lonap net Technical Director LONAP Ltd
Current thread:
- Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Kai Chen (Feb 14)
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points bmanning (Feb 14)
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Paul Vixie (Feb 14)
- Message not available
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Paul Vixie (Feb 14)
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Michuki Mwangi (Feb 14)
- Message not available
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Greg VILLAIN (Feb 15)
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 16)
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Will Hargrave (Feb 16)
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Andy Davidson (Feb 14)
- Re: Question on the topology of Internet Exchange Points Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 14)