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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

Reply via email to