Middle Eastern Exchange Points
woody at pch.net
Wed Feb 8 18:45:47 UTC 2006
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> Guys, are you being semantic?
Yes, we're doggedly insisting that words mean what they're defined to
mean, rather than the opposite.
> You keep saying EMIX
> and you're confusing me. Peering or no? "IX" naturally insinuates
> yes regardless of neutrality.
Exactly. "IX" as a component of a name is _intended to insinuate_ the
availability of peering, _regardless of whether that's actually true or
false_. Which is why we keep analogizing to the STIX, which was _called_
an IX, but was _not_ an IX, in that it had nothing to do with peering,
only with a single provider's commercial transit product. The same is
currently true throughout much of the Middle East.
More information about the NANOG