Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 130, Issue 23

[Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>]

As an IX operator, that doesn't always get you anywhere. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

----- Original Message -----

From: "DurgaPrasad - DatasoftComnet" <dp () datasoftcomnet com> 
To: nanog () nanog org 
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2018 6:12:48 AM 
Subject: Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 130, Issue 23 

Hi, 
It's better to copy and take help of the IXP team where you are physically connected. 

Rgds/DP 
9849111010 

Sent from my iPhone. Pls excuse brevity and typos if any. 

> On 25-Nov-2018, at 5:30 PM, nanog-request () nanog org wrote: 
>
> Send NANOG mailing list submissions to 
> nanog () nanog org 
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit 
> https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog 
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to 
> nanog-request () nanog org 
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at 
> nanog-owner () nanog org 
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific 
> than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..." 
>
>
> Today's Topics: 
>
> 1. Re: Amazon Peering (Mike Hammett) 
> 2. Re: Amazon Peering (Darin Steffl) 
> 3. Re: Amazon Peering (JASON BOTHE) 
> 4. RE: Internet diameter? (Hal Murray) 
> 5. DWDM forums (Ben Cannon) 
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>
> Message: 1 
> Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 10:38:49 -0600 (CST) 
> From: Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> 
> To: Darin Steffl <darin.steffl () mnwifi com> 
> Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog () nanog org> 
> Subject: Re: Amazon Peering 
> Message-ID: 
> <1966321065.11280.1543077528570.JavaMail.mhammett@ThunderFuck> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" 
>
> I've e-mailed my contacts there a couple times on people's behalf. No response yet. 
>
> It seems like a lot of organizations need 1 more person in their peering departments. 
>
>
>
>
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
>
> Midwest-IX 
> http://www.midwest-ix.com 
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
>
> From: "Darin Steffl" <darin.steffl () mnwifi com> 
> To: "North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog () nanog org> 
> Sent: Friday, November 23, 2018 10:21:51 PM 
> Subject: Amazon Peering 
>
>
> Hey all, 
>
>
> Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session established with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request 
> Dec 2017 and two more times this Sept and Nov with no response. 
>
>
> I sent to peering () amazon com and received one automated response back so I know they received my email but nothing 
> since. 
>
>
>
>
>
> -- 
>
>
> Darin Steffl 
> Minnesota WiFi 
> www.mnwifi.com 
> 507-634-WiFi 
> Like us on Facebook 
> -------------- next part -------------- 
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... 
> URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20181124/6cca0678/attachment-0001.html> 
>
> ------------------------------ 
>
> Message: 2 
> Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 10:59:21 -0600 
> From: Darin Steffl <darin.steffl () mnwifi com> 
> To: Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> 
> Cc: "North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog () nanog org> 
> Subject: Re: Amazon Peering 
> Message-ID: 
> <CAH-uaepqS37C43AQzoWxKk8DzT9soM3QAx1=rJ=DvpC0AOJuPg () mail gmail com> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" 
>
> It seems wasteful for Amazon to connect to an IX but then ignore peering 
> requests for a year. 
>
> They have 40G of connectivity but are unresponsive. I'll try emailing all 
> the other contacts listed in peeringdb. 
>
> Thanks 
>
> > On Sat, Nov 24, 2018, 10:38 AM Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net wrote: 
> >
> > I've e-mailed my contacts there a couple times on people's behalf. No 
> > response yet. 
> >
> > It seems like a lot of organizations need 1 more person in their peering 
> > departments. 
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- 
> > Mike Hammett 
> > Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> > http://www.ics-il.com 
> >
> > Midwest-IX 
> > http://www.midwest-ix.com 
> >
> > ------------------------------ 
> > *From: *"Darin Steffl" <darin.steffl () mnwifi com> 
> > *To: *"North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog () nanog org> 
> > *Sent: *Friday, November 23, 2018 10:21:51 PM 
> > *Subject: *Amazon Peering 
> >
> > Hey all, 
> >
> > Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session established 
> > with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering request Dec 2017 and two more times 
> > this Sept and Nov with no response. 
> >
> > I sent to peering () amazon com and received one automated response back so 
> > I know they received my email but nothing since. 
> >
> >
> >
> > -- 
> > Darin Steffl 
> > Minnesota WiFi 
> > www.mnwifi.com 
> > 507-634-WiFi 
> > <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook 
> > <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> 
> -------------- next part -------------- 
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... 
> URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20181124/a90e9544/attachment-0001.html> 
>
> ------------------------------ 
>
> Message: 3 
> Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 11:29:57 -0600 
> From: JASON BOTHE <jbothe () me com> 
> To: Darin Steffl <darin.steffl () mnwifi com> 
> Cc: Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>, North American Network Operators' 
> Group <nanog () nanog org> 
> Subject: Re: Amazon Peering 
> Message-ID: <F274658B-DDF1-4730-900F-821222D46A75 () me com> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" 
>
> This is a note I received on Oct18 when checking on a peering request submitted on Aug7.. 
>
> “Apologies for the delays here. We have temporarily frozen IX peering as we revise some of our automation processes. 
> I’m hopeful this will be unblocked by early November. Thank you for your continued patience.” 
>
> > On Nov 24, 2018, at 10:59, Darin Steffl <darin.steffl () mnwifi com> wrote: 
> >
> > It seems wasteful for Amazon to connect to an IX but then ignore peering requests for a year. 
> >
> > They have 40G of connectivity but are unresponsive. I'll try emailing all the other contacts listed in peeringdb. 
> >
> > Thanks 
> >
> > > On Sat, Nov 24, 2018, 10:38 AM Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net wrote: 
> > > I've e-mailed my contacts there a couple times on people's behalf. No response yet. 
> > >
> > > It seems like a lot of organizations need 1 more person in their peering departments. 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- 
> > > Mike Hammett 
> > > Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> > > http://www.ics-il.com 
> > >
> > > Midwest-IX 
> > > http://www.midwest-ix.com 
> > >
> > > From: "Darin Steffl" <darin.steffl () mnwifi com> 
> > > To: "North American Network Operators' Group" <nanog () nanog org> 
> > > Sent: Friday, November 23, 2018 10:21:51 PM 
> > > Subject: Amazon Peering 
> > >
> > > Hey all, 
> > >
> > > Does anyone have a direct contact to get a peering session established with Amazon at an IX? I sent a peering 
> > > request Dec 2017 and two more times this Sept and Nov with no response. 
> > >
> > > I sent to peering () amazon com and received one automated response back so I know they received my email but 
> > > nothing since. 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -- 
> > > Darin Steffl 
> > > Minnesota WiFi 
> > > www.mnwifi.com 
> > > 507-634-WiFi 
> > > Like us on Facebook 
> -------------- next part -------------- 
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... 
> URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20181124/d8823211/attachment-0001.html> 
>
> ------------------------------ 
>
> Message: 4 
> Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 17:47:31 -0800 
> From: Hal Murray <hgm+nanog () ip-64-139-1-69 sjc megapath net> 
> To: nanog () nanog org 
> Cc: hgm+nanog () ip-64-139-1-69 sjc megapath net 
> Subject: RE: Internet diameter? 
> Message-ID: 
> <20181125014731.C27B040605C () ip-64-139-1-69 sjc megapath net> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 
>
>
> Keith Medcalf said: 
> > "just static content" would be more accurate ... 
>
> and using http rather than https 
>
> > There were many attempts at this by Johhny-cum-lately ISPs back in the 90's 
> > -- particularly Telco and Cableco's -- with their "transparent poxies". 
> > Eventually they discovered that it was more cost efficient to actually 
> > provide the customer with what the customer had purchased. 
>
> One of the complications in this area is an extra layer of logging which could 
> turn into privacy invasion. 
>
> I'm pretty sure it was Comcast, but a quick search didn't find a good 
> reference. Many years ago, there were a lot of complaints when customers 
> discovered that their transparent proxy web site traffic was getting logged. 
> Comcast said they weren't using it for anything beyond normal operations work, 
> but nobody believed them. Shortly after that, they gave up on proxying. 
>
> I'm sure the general reputation of modern Telcos and Cablecos for privacy 
> invasion didn't help. 
>
>
> -- 
> These are my opinions. I hate spam. 
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------ 
>
> Message: 5 
> Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2018 22:05:05 -0800 
> From: Ben Cannon <ben () 6by7 net> 
> To: nanog list <nanog () nanog org> 
> Subject: DWDM forums 
> Message-ID: <5C6667D7-0CF2-4801-840F-C67F213D1F04 () 6by7 net> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 
>
> Apologies for the noise, but can anyone recommend some DWDM or other glass/laser/amplifier communities or forums? 
> There has to be a ton of overlap with this group. 
> -Ben. 
>
> End of NANOG Digest, Vol 130, Issue 23 
> **************************************