nanog mailing list archives

Re: Peering Exchange Configurations


From: Grzegorz Janoszka <Grzegorz () Janoszka pl>
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 18:44:14 +0200

On 8-4-2010 18:02, Brad Fleming wrote:
1) Is a private AS typically used for the exchange side of the session?

No.

2) Are RFC1918 IPs typically used for the p2p links into the exchange?

No. In EU usually it is separate public /24, /23 or /22. The IPv6 range in RIPE region for exchanges is assigned from within special pool 2001:7f8::/32 (each IX gets /48).

3) Do peering exchanges typically remove their AS from the path
advertised to exchange participants?

The direct peering is between participants AS'es, there is nothing in between, including IX AS. Route-servers based on Cisco box put their AS number in between, but Quagga/Bird usually remove the IX as, however it may be configured per peer not to do so.

3a) If no: Do participants typically preference exchange-learned routes
over other sources?

Most do.

4) Do exchanges typically support the following address families?
IPv4 Multicast

no

IPv6 Unicast

Almost all.

IPv6 Multicast

No.

In exchanges where a route server is employed:
4) Do participants have a p2p link into a simple routing environment
then multi-hop to a route server?

Route-server is just like one of the members of the exchange. You get /23 or similar prefix of the exchange. You may have a BGP session with the route-server, but you are also free to have direct BGP sessions with other parties. Route-servers are mostly used by peers with open peering policies, but you still may steer your announcements basing on BGP communities.

5) I see that Bird, OpenBDGd, and Quagga are all options for route
server software. Does one of those packages stand out as the clear
current choice for production peering exchanges?

Quagga was used most often, but recently most biggest EU exchanges replaced it with Bird and it is much more stable.

--
Grzegorz Janoszka


Current thread: