nanog mailing list archives
Re: PCH Peering Survey 2021
From: Denis Fondras <xxnog () ledeuns net>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 18:55:23 +0200
Le Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 01:47:37PM +0200, Bill Woodcock a écrit :
If you’re peering with an MLPA route-server, you’re welcome to include just the route-server’s ASN, if that’s easiest, rather than trying to include each of the peer ASNs on the other side of the route-server. Either way is fine.
I have an agreement with the RS owner (IXP) but not with each participant. Should the contractual relationship be true or false ?
Current thread:
- PCH Peering Survey 2021 Bill Woodcock (Oct 29)
- Re: PCH Peering Survey 2021 Denis Fondras (Oct 29)
- Re: PCH Peering Survey 2021 Bill Woodcock (Oct 29)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: PCH Peering Survey 2021 Adam Thompson (Oct 31)
- Re: PCH Peering Survey 2021 Denis Fondras (Oct 29)