ixreport

Serverion: PeeringDB fix list

AS213035 · peeringdb.com/net/23981

PeeringDB

4 things to fix in Serverion's PeeringDB record, from what its exchanges publish: 1 to add, 3 to correct. As of 2026-10-08 22:13 UTC.

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

Add these exchanges (1)

On the exchange's own member list, but not in Serverion's PeeringDB record. Add one entry per connection with these values.

  1. Netherlands LSIX Amsterdam, The Hague, Rotterdam, Naaldwijk, Netherlands · PeeringDB 1308From its website members list

    The exchange's website members list doesn't give addresses or a speed. Use the addresses on your router, or ask the exchange.

Correct these entries (3)

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. Netherlands GNM-IX Amsterdam, Netherlands · PeeringDB 358
    ProblemPeeringDB hasThe export has
    Port speed differs4 × 100G100G

    PeeringDB's IX-F import is on for this exchange and this network allows automatic updates, so PeeringDB should make this change by itself. If it hasn't, PeeringDB may have hit a conflict: check the IX-F suggestions on the network's PeeringDB page.

  2. Netherlands INTERIX Amsterdam, Netherlands · PeeringDB 3990
    ProblemPeeringDB hasThe export has
    Port speed differs2 × 100G100G

    PeeringDB's IX-F import is on for this exchange and this network allows automatic updates, so PeeringDB should make this change by itself. If it hasn't, PeeringDB may have hit a conflict: check the IX-F suggestions on the network's PeeringDB page.

  3. Netherlands Speed-IX Dronten, Netherlands · PeeringDB 1842
    ProblemPeeringDB hasThe export has
    Port speed differs2 × 10G10G

    PeeringDB's IX-F import is on for this exchange and this network allows automatic updates, so PeeringDB should make this change by itself. If it hasn't, PeeringDB may have hit a conflict: check the IX-F suggestions on the network's PeeringDB page.

From ixreport.com/net/213035/: 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.