On Jul 09, 2014, at 15:36 , Bill Woodcock <wo...@pch.net> wrote: > On Jul 9, 2014, at 11:35 AM, Zaid A. Kahn <z...@zaidali.com> wrote: > >> PeeringDB www.peeringdb.com is the defacto source of truth. > > That’s user-submitted data. The PCH directory is twenty years old, and is > independently verified by our staff. So what’s there isn’t always > up-to-date, but we do differentiate between rumor and something that’s been > verified by someone going and laying eyes on it.
It is ever-so-slightly better than user-submitted data. Specifically, if an IX or a colo tells us "this person says they are a [Customer|Member|whatever] and they are not", we will remove that row from the DB. Then again, PeeringDB never claimed to be anything but user-submitted data. Just the opposite. > On Jul 9, 2014, at 11:34 AM, William F. Maton Sotomayor <wma...@ottix.net> > wrote: >> https://prefix.pch.net/applications/ixpdir/ > > Or, more specifically, > > https://prefix.pch.net/applications/ixpdir/index.php?new=1&show_active_only=1&sort=Region&order=desc > > …gets you exactly what you’re looking for. Taking just Seattle IX (since I have a personal interest there :), it says "177" under "participants", but <http://www.seattleix.net/participants.htm> disagrees. To be clear, PCH does a better job than most (all?) others. And a ridiculously difficult job it is. Finding how each IXP presents its user / traffic / whatever data an trying to collate it is nearly impossible. But thank you for trying! -- TTFN, patrick
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
