EPIX.EPINET: PeeringDB fix list

AS201925 · peeringdb.com/net/41648

PeeringDB

2 things to fix in EPIX.EPINET's PeeringDB record, from what its exchanges publish: 2 to correct. As of 2026-10-08 20:58 UTC.

Make the changes on EPIX.EPINET's PeeringDB page: sign in, choose Edit, and find the exchanges under Public Peering Exchange Points. Speeds go in as megabits per second.

Correct these entries (2)

Addresses or port speeds in PeeringDB that differ from the exchange's IX-F export. The changes below follow the export; if the export is the one that's wrong, tell the exchange instead.

  1. Poland EPIX.Katowice Katowice/Silesia, Poland · PeeringDB 491
    ProblemPeeringDB hasThe export has
    IPv4 address missing from PeeringDB178.216.40.188 178.216.41.252178.216.40.62 178.216.40.188 178.216.41.252
    IPv6 address missing from PeeringDB2001:7f8:5b::188 2001:7f8:5b::5072001:7f8:5b::62 2001:7f8:5b::188 2001:7f8:5b::507
    Port speed differs2 × 100G200G + 20G + 10G
    • In the entry with IPv4 178.216.40.188: set Speed to 10000 (10G) (now 100000).
    • In the entry with IPv4 178.216.41.252: set Speed to 200000 (200G) (now 100000).
    • Add an entry: IPv4 178.216.40.62, IPv6 2001:7f8:5b::62, speed 20000 (20G), RS peer yes.

    PeeringDB's IX-F import is on for this exchange, so PeeringDB also suggests this change on the network's PeeringDB page.

  2. Poland EPIX.Warszawa Warsaw, Poland · PeeringDB 474
    ProblemPeeringDB hasThe export has
    IPv4 address missing from PeeringDB89.46.144.19889.46.144.168 89.46.144.198 89.46.145.12
    IPv6 address missing from PeeringDB2001:678:3ac::1982001:678:3ac::168 2001:678:3ac::198 2001:678:3ac::367
    Port speed differs100G200G + 2 × 20G
    • In the entry with IPv4 89.46.144.198: set Speed to 200000 (200G) (now 100000).
    • Add an entry: IPv4 89.46.144.168, IPv6 2001:678:3ac::168, speed 20000 (20G), RS peer yes.
    • Add an entry: IPv4 89.46.145.12, IPv6 2001:678:3ac::367, speed 20000 (20G), RS peer yes.

    PeeringDB's IX-F import is on for this exchange, so PeeringDB also suggests this change on the network's PeeringDB page.

From ixreport.com/net/201925/: PeeringDB against each exchange's IX-F export and website members list. Exchanges whose lists couldn't be read on this update aren't included.