 |
 |
The answer is somewhere in the middle. We do whats best for the exchange, and for the internet in general. There are MANY things where this is what was done by the community. Honest question...if someone wants to put an extension in Rio, Brazil, do we let them? How about in South Africa? Is there a line? An exchange has a purpose, and thats to get everyone local to each other, on one fabric...otherwise we are just making Cogents IX thing they sell, or any one of the number of global fabrics. At SOME point we need to say enough is enough. I am NOT saying we are there yet, but to allow EVERYTHING is a bit too much in the other direction. Reid Reid On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:44 AM Jeremy Lumby <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > I completely agree that the number of people who know very little about > BGP is growing quickly, the real question is how do you deal with this > problem. Do you not permit things across the board because of this, > meaning that the opportunity is lost for the people that understand what > they are doing? Or do you put as many reasonable precautions in place so > that when someone screws up, it mostly just impacts them, and all of the > other members maintain granular control? > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf > Of *Reid Fishler > *Sent:* Thursday, March 24, 2022 9:12 PM > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Remote Switch Policy > > > > The issue is there are going to be more and more networks that are buying > these peering services that don't always know what they are... Either by > services, or because 'someone told me to'... Its not always those in the > know that buy these things... Sometimes it's networks that DON'T know. > > > > Reid > > > > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022, 10:04 PM Jeremy Lumby <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > I understand the point a little better now. I would say it depends on the > specific type of CDN. The more traditional ones like Cloudflare and Akamai > it would not be a huge disincentive because they market themselves based on > how close/low latency they are to the end user. Other CDNs that are > delivering more of their own content like Netflix/Google would be more > grateful for the free transport, and care less about the added latency > (assuming no loss). > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of > Richard Laager > Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 8:46 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Remote Switch Policy > > On 3/24/22 18:00, Jeremy Lumby wrote: > > As for a disincentive for CDN's to connect, I have only seen the > opposite. Most CDN's will only accept a connection to the core. The only > time I have seen them connect to a remote was for a secondary connection to > gain switch diversity. > > I wasn't talking about CDNs connecting to remotes. The concern, or at > least how I understood it, was: Imagine we put a MICE extension in city > X. In the immediate term, that's great, as now networks in city X can > get content from Minneapolis CDNs. But in the longer-term, it may create > a disincentive for CDNs to go to city X. > > Counter-point: Whether CDNs come to city X is not our problem. > > -- > Richard > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > -- Reid Fishler Senior Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178