nanog mailing list archives

Re: AW: AW: AW: Peering Exchange


From: "i3D.net - Martijn Schmidt" <martijnschmidt () i3d net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 21:59:50 +0100

Hi Jürgen,

Well, I did say "nearly" every major IP transit provider.. :-)

If BGP action communities are important to your network and your
existing upstream(s) don't support them, then maybe it is time to start
looking for a different transit provider.

Best regards,
Martijn

On 01/27/2016 03:31 PM, Jürgen Jaritsch wrote:
Hi Dovid,

Yes, vitamin B often helps. But it doesn't matter - if the transit provider doesn't support it on an official way you 
do net get an SLA for the communities. They could stop working from one day to another ...

 

Jürgen Jaritsch
Head of Network & Infrastructure

ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH

Telefon: +43-5-0556-300
Telefax: +43-5-0556-500

E-Mail: JJaritsch () anexia-it com 
Web: http://www.anexia-it.com 

Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler
Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dovid Bender [mailto:dovid () telecurve com] 
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Jänner 2016 15:23
An: Jürgen Jaritsch <jj () anexia at>; NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org>; i3D net - Martijn Schmidt <martijnschmidt 
() i3d net>; Andrey Yakovlev <andy.yakov () ya ru>; Bernd Spiess <bernd.spiess () ip-it com>; Colton Conor 
<colton.conor () gmail com>; Hugo Slabbert <hugo () slabnet com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Peering Exchange

HE will if you know who to speak to...

Regards,

Dovid

-----Original Message-----
From: Jürgen Jaritsch <jj () anexia at>
Sender: "NANOG" <nanog-bounces () nanog org>Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 14:20:31 
To: i3D net - Martijn Schmidt<martijnschmidt () i3d net>; Andrey Yakovlev<andy.yakov () ya ru>; Bernd 
Spiess<bernd.spiess () ip-it com>; Colton Conor<colton.conor () gmail com>; Hugo Slabbert<hugo () slabnet com>
Cc: NANOG<nanog () nanog org>
Subject: AW: AW: Peering Exchange

Hi Martjin,

I think nearly every major IP transit provider has built out a BGP action community system to allow their customers 
to control prefix announcements in
That’s also what I thought but the truth is: there are MANY major transit providers who simply doesn't support any 
community ... one of the most famous is Hurricane Electric :(



Jürgen Jaritsch
Head of Network & Infrastructure

ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH

Telefon: +43-5-0556-300
Telefax: +43-5-0556-500

E-Mail: JJaritsch () anexia-it com 
Web: http://www.anexia-it.com 

Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler
Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] Im Auftrag von i3D.net - Martijn Schmidt
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Jänner 2016 15:01
An: Andrey Yakovlev <andy.yakov () ya ru>; Bernd Spiess <bernd.spiess () ip-it com>; Colton Conor <colton.conor () 
gmail com>; Hugo Slabbert <hugo () slabnet com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Betreff: Re: AW: Peering Exchange

"We also had problems where transit customers said don't want to be
exported to a certain IX point of presence while he wanted to be
exported at a different location."

That's a fairly normal request. I think nearly every major IP transit
provider has built out a BGP action community system to allow their
customers to control prefix announcements in the way you're describing
it here (e.g. prepending and no-export to certain peers/upstreams). Of
course outbound traffic from your customer to "the rest of the world"
can not be controlled that way.

Best regards,
Martijn

On 01/27/2016 02:23 AM, Andrey Yakovlev wrote:
Some companies present at some IX with no MLPE simply don't like to be listed at all, and they prefer to be filtered 
out from LG servers. It's simply their police and some big companies do not have a policy which is the same for 
everyone peering, say, content provider X will peer with you if you reach >80Mbps, could not always be true. I have 
lived a situation where someone demanded to peer to a DC I happened to manage at that time because his competitor 
was peering as well and sharing the same IX, but my company had no real reason to peer from the NOC perspective and 
using another port would just be a waste of time and money with no real advantage other than a barely better 
latency. Manager said no thanks, as asked for our peering policy to become private. Sometimes things just don't have 
a better explanation and some people just don't want to accept a different policy to different players.
We also had problems where transit customers said don't want to be exported to a certain IX point of presence while 
he wanted to be exported at a different location. Who ever told him he could pick where we export who? Nobody. In 
the end if you are seriously interested to join the IX you will bet the full list for MLPEs, etc. Otherwise it's 
just the policy for the club.

-- 
./andy


26.01.2016, 22:23, "Bernd Spiess" <bernd.spiess () ip-it com>:
  Is there a way to browse a route server at
  certain exchanges, and see who is and is not on the route server?
 Quite many ixp´s do so ... so you can verify yourself what is going on...
 Typical offer of a looking glass:
 You can see the sessions, you can see the amount of prefixes,
 You can see the prefix list and you can see the communities & more
 on these prefixes

 E.g.:
 https://lg.nyc.de-cix.net/
 https://lg.dxb.de-cix.net/
 https://lg.mrs.de-cix.net/ ... and others ...
 https://www.linx.net/pubtools/looking-glass.html
 https://tieatl-server1.telx.com/lg.pl
 etc...

 not sure why this should be hidden ... but yes: there are some
 ixp out there who does not show this information or just with a
 login ...

 Bernd
 (yes ... I do work for de-cix)






Current thread: