A prefix is a prefix. A route is a prefix plus a next-hop. Your next hop for 
your PNI is different than your IX. 

I don't believe I advocated running IX links hot. Financially, as an IX 
operator, I'd prefer that people ran all their bits over an IX and that all 
links were best kept below 10% utilization. ;-) Obviously I know that's not 
good engineering or fiscally responsible on the network's behalf. Just going to 
the extreme to support my point. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest-IX 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Mark Tinka" <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> 
To: "Mike Hammett" <na...@ics-il.net> 
Cc: nanog@nanog.org 
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 8:14:44 AM 
Subject: Re: Calling LinkedIn, Amazon and Akamai @ DE-CIX NY 




On 31/Jan/19 15:54, Mike Hammett wrote: 




Not all routes are created equal. If you have a PNI and an IX connection of 
equal capacity, obviously the IX connection will fill up first given that there 
is more opportunity there. 


I think you meant to say not all "paths" are equal. Routes are routes. Where 
they lead to is another matter. 

The presence of a PNI does not preclude good governance of an exchange point 
link. If you are going to (willingly or otherwise) ignore the health of your 
public peering links over your private ones (or vice versa), then I wish upon 
you all the hell you'll face that comes with taking that position. 

Our policy is simple - 50% utilized, you upgrade. Doesn't matter what type of 
link it is; WDM Transport, IP, peering (public or private), Metro, core 
backbone, protection paths, e.t.c. Choosing to let your public peering links 
run hot because your "major" peers are taken care of by the private links is 
irresponsible. Do a lot of networks do it; hell yes, and for reasons you'd not 
think are obvious. 


<blockquote>

Also, there are more moving parts in an IX (and accompanying route servers), 
thus more to go wrong. 

</blockquote>

Agreed, but that's not the crux of this thread (even though it's one of the 
reasons we do not relay solely on RS's). 

Mark. 

Reply via email to