Completely a guess, but; Maybe something to do with automatic detection and remediation of incorrectly redistributed routes? Would be much easier to do this if you have a definitive list of bilateral peers.
On topic - We have bilateral peering with AS16509 over both Mel and Syd MegaIX, as well as IXAus Vic and EquinixIX Syd. These have all been stood up in the past 6 months, but it was ~8+ months after my initial request. I emailed the contact on the peeringdb page, the email seems to have changed so it's probably not prudent to share the old address. Unless we're talking about a significant traffic volume, I think patience is the only approach. On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 at 10:35, Paul Holmanskikh <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2021-01-09 01:14, James Murphy wrote: > > Our BGP sessions to Amazon are up with 700+ prefixes received from them. > So physically they still around. Microsoft pulled yourself from RS on > Megaport some time ago, now AWS. It becomes a trend now. What are they win > by reducing connectivity? > > > Amazon stopped appearing under Mega IX Melbourne and Sydney on December > 10th - something must have changed then.. (thanks PeeringDB backups > <http://data.caida.org/datasets/peeringdb> [1][2]) > > They appear on the MegaIX looking glass, but with 0 advertised routes. > > Anyone know anything more? > > > [1] curl+jq for December 9th: > curl -s > http://data.caida.org/datasets/peeringdb/2020/12/peeringdb_2_dump_2020_12_09.json > | jq -cr '.net as $net | ($net.data | INDEX(.id)) as $netmap | > .netixlan.data[] | select(.ix_id == 779 or .ix_id == 780) | ["netixlan", > .ix_id, .name, "net", .net_id, ($netmap[(.net_id | tostring)] | .name)] | > @tsv' > > [2] curl+jq for December 10th: > curl -s > http://data.caida.org/datasets/peeringdb/2020/12/peeringdb_2_dump_2020_12_10.json > | jq -cr '.net as $net | ($net.data | INDEX(.id)) as $netmap | > .netixlan.data[] | select(.ix_id == 779 or .ix_id == 780) | ["netixlan", > .ix_id, .name, "net", .net_id, ($netmap[(.net_id | tostring)] | .name)] | > @tsv' > > > On 8 Jan 2021, at 11:46 pm, Paul Holmanskikh <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > What do you mean under AWS ? Amazon AS16509? We have bilateral peering > with Amazon in Megaport Sydney. But it was setup years ago. I can try to > dig out old mails, but I bet everything is changed since then. > > On 2020-12-31 10:57, Andres Miedzowicz wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > > Is someone aware if AWS will do bilateral peering over MegaIX in Melbourne > and Sydney? I noticed they are not in the Route Server and peeringdb.com > doesn't > show them in those exchanges but the MegaIX looking glass does. If they do > peering, do you have a contact email I can write to? I tried with > [email protected] but haven't received a response. > > > I saw a thread about this from 2018 in AusNOG that would indicate that > they won't peer over MegaIX but maybe things have changed in a few years. > > > Regards, > > > Andres > > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > > > --- > NEXON - I.T. FOR THE DYNAMIC BUSINESS > Paul Holmanskikh > Senior Network Engineer > > Disclaimer: The contents of this email represent my own views and not > necessarily the views of my employer > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog > > > --- > NEXON - I.T. FOR THE DYNAMIC BUSINESS > Paul Holmanskikh > Senior Network Engineer > > Disclaimer: The contents of this email represent my own views and not > necessarily the views of my employer > _______________________________________________ > AusNOG mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog >
_______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
