RE: IX in Iran by TIC

["Chuck Church" <chuckchurch () gmail com>]

Foul language is frowned upon.

https://www.nanog.org/list

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of James Bensley
Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2016 4:24 AM
To: nanog <nanog () nanog org>
Subject: Re: IX in Iran by TIC

On 12 July 2016 at 14:36, Bevan Slattery <bevan () slattery net au> wrote:
> EXAMPLE 1.
> There maybe for example an enterprise  that is looking for a service 
> provider in a facility (XYZ in NY for example) but that provider 
> actually "peers" their transit routers at the ABC facility down the 
> street.  Because the provider doesn't peer in XYZ there is no public 
> record of them being there in peering DB.  Providers are in heaps of 
> DC's/locations that they just don't peer.  So they effectively have no 
> central location where people can see that they are "available to 
> service".  This is more of a directory of where providers are and what services they can provide.

Hmm, so maybe I'm just a maverick, we are not using any public peering fabrics at minute due to what can only be 
described as a senior management cluster foook [1], so on peeringdb we list some pops that we are in that we are 
willing (and do) have private peering sessions in. It doesn't say on peeringdb that there are IX's in some of these 
PoPs but hopefully when we need to establish a private interconnect with someone they will see we are in the same PoP 
as them even though there is no IX in that PoP and put 2 and 2 together, and contact us to discuss a cross connect.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not trying to poo poo the site, just trying to work out where the different is feature 
set lies exactly.


Cheers,
James.


[1] Is this a list for adults or children, my original email bounced back because I used the work f*ck?