On 14 Oct 2003, at 12:36, Bill Woodcock wrote:
is this something that an ix could/should worry about?
Absolutely not, as that intrudes upon the terms of the commercial relationship between the individual members of the exchange.
The HKIX in Hong Kong maintains a an access-list per member on its route server configuration, and mails out copies on a members list periodically so that people can check that their filter is up-to-date. The APE in Auckland and the WIX in Wellington, New Zealand both include route servers which are well-used. Both route servers incorporate route filters for peers which are built from a citylink-operated IRR-like database which speaks RPSL. So while none of these examples illustrate exchange operators requiring any kind of registration of routes (there are no restrictions on direct peering sessions across the exchanges, for example) the popularity of the route servers on these exchanges provides some incentive for peers to publish their export policies. These might be unusual examples, of course. I have done no great survey. Joe