nanog mailing list archives
Re: Amazon peering revisited
From: Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2022 16:27:37 -0600 (CST)
"For a company like Amazon..."
True, but also, they're at a size where staffing and operating peering operations generously has a negligible impact on
the fiscal situation of the company (or even department).
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Burke" <kburke () burlingtontelecom com>
To: "Lincoln Dale" <ltd () interlink com au>, "Kelly Littlepage" <kelly () onechronos com>
Cc: nanog () nanog org
Sent: Friday, February 4, 2022 3:25:53 PM
Subject: RE: Amazon peering revisited
Have gotten into the habit of making annual peering requests to Amazon asking turn up a session on a shared IXP
peering. Once was able to get a peering session turned up, no traffic was ever shifted onto it before we moved out of
that carrier hotel a year or so later. The amazon peering email box does have humans surfing it.
Over the years a number of network operators have mentioned getting little response from Amazon about peering requests.
For a company like Amazon they have little reason to do peering with small scale operators. They already peer with the
tier 1’s and assume I will do what I need to balance my bits. The fancy algorithms they use to balance traffic around
does allow them to operate a decent network with fewer staff and less links to the small ISPs. Just a network operator
here, trying to get my bytes across the wire.
Enjoy your weekend!
Kevin Burke
802-540-0979
Burlington Telecom
200 Church St, Burlington, VT
From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+kburke=burlingtontelecom.com () nanog org> On Behalf Of Lincoln Dale
Sent: Thursday, February 3, 2022 12:20 PM
To: Kelly Littlepage <kelly () onechronos com>
Cc: nanog () nanog org
Subject: Re: Amazon peering revisited
WARNING!! This message originated from an External Source . Please use proper judgment and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 8:22 AM Kelly Littlepage via NANOG < nanog () nanog org > wrote:
Hi all, a nanog thread started on November 23, 2018 discussed the challenges of getting Amazon peering sessions turned
up. Has anyone had luck since/does anyone have a contact they could refer me to — off-list or otherwise? The process of
getting PNI in place with other CSPs was straightforward, but I haven't heard back from AWS after a month and several
follow-ups. Our customers would really benefit from us getting this sorted.
There are many folks that here that are in AWS. Assuming you have followed what is in https://aws.amazon.com/peering/
(and https://aws.amazon.com/peering/policy/ ) then send me details privately about what/when/who and I'll reach out
internally to the relevant folks.
Current thread:
- Re: Amazon peering revisited Lincoln Dale (Feb 03)
- RE: Amazon peering revisited Kevin Burke (Feb 04)
- Re: Amazon peering revisited Mike Hammett (Feb 04)
- Re: Amazon peering revisited Martin Hannigan (Feb 04)
- Re: Amazon peering revisited Andras Toth (Feb 04)
- Re: Amazon peering revisited Mike Hammett (Feb 04)
- Re: Amazon peering revisited Eric Kuhnke (Feb 05)
- RE: Amazon peering revisited Don Fanning (Feb 05)
- RE: Amazon peering revisited Don Fanning (Feb 05)
- RE: Amazon peering revisited Kevin Burke (Feb 04)
