3 Aug
2021
3 Aug
'21
11:52 p.m.
Ah yes, that is easier, I provide the same thing for several clients. You still get the
good routes though!
-----Original Message-----
From: 44Net <44net-bounces+colin.bodor=imperium.ca(a)mailman.ampr.org> On Behalf Of
Rob PE1CHL via 44Net
Sent: Tuesday, August 3, 2021 10:51
To: 44net(a)mailman.ampr.org
Cc: Rob PE1CHL <44net(a)pe1chl.nl>
Subject: Re: [44net] On Allocations, PoPs, and Proposals
Just as in the current situation, we will not be doing peering ourselves but we leave that
to the company that sponsors our hosting.
They are well connected to local and international peers and it is so much easier to not
have to arrange that.
They will advertise our subnet and statically route the traffic to us.
Rob
On 8/3/21 6:01 PM, Colin Bodor via 44Net wrote:
Next to AMS-IX, or are you actually peering on AMS-IX?
A valid consideration for future POP locations should be internet exchange connectivity. A
100gig connection could be great (if used) but if you want lower latency an IX will be
much better than some large transit provider, especially if you are connecting to a
geographically local POP. The whole POP proposal reads likes a CDN build but without
mentioning the criticality of being peered on exchange points. IXs serve many purposes but
one of them is keeping local traffic local, and thus latency "low". I only ask
to bring it up as part of the discussion and so I know at least someone else who is
dealing with 44net prefixes and an IX 😉
-C
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)mailman.ampr.org
https://mailman.ampr.org/mailman/listinfo/44net