AW: AW: AW: Peering Exchange

Wed Jan 27 20:59:50 UTC 2016

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 at 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 at telecurve.com] 
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Jänner 2016 15:23
> An: Jürgen Jaritsch <jj at anexia.at>; NANOG <nanog-bounces at nanog.org>; i3D net - Martijn Schmidt <martijnschmidt at i3d.net>; Andrey Yakovlev <andy.yakov at ya.ru>; Bernd Spiess <bernd.spiess at ip-it.com>; Colton Conor <colton.conor at gmail.com>; Hugo Slabbert <hugo at slabnet.com>
> Cc: NANOG <nanog at 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 at anexia.at>
> Sender: "NANOG" <nanog-bounces at nanog.org>Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 14:20:31 
> To: i3D net - Martijn Schmidt<martijnschmidt at i3d.net>; Andrey Yakovlev<andy.yakov at ya.ru>; Bernd Spiess<bernd.spiess at ip-it.com>; Colton Conor<colton.conor at gmail.com>; Hugo Slabbert<hugo at slabnet.com>
> Cc: NANOG<nanog at 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 at 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 at nanog.org] Im Auftrag von i3D.net - Martijn Schmidt
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Jänner 2016 15:01
> An: Andrey Yakovlev <andy.yakov at ya.ru>; Bernd Spiess <bernd.spiess at ip-it.com>; Colton Conor <colton.conor at gmail.com>; Hugo Slabbert <hugo at slabnet.com>
> Cc: NANOG <nanog at 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 at 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)
>
>