[bdNOG] BIG FAT Pipe with INDIA - or - GOOD Transit Providers - or - Something else

Sat Nov 23 13:01:36 BDT 2013

Dear Simon Bhai / Hasib Bhai

No doubt about local peering. Putting GGC/Akamai in IX is bigger part
but don't you think still we are missing few important issues:

1. Only one site (www.prothom-alo.com) is hosted in BD among the top 50
sites in Bangladesh (ranked by Alexa).
2. AFAIK only one Telco is connected in BDIX. Not sure about the WiMAX.
3. ISP them self hosting there mail server in Google Cloud rather than
maintaining it by themselves.
4. Very little/no initiatives to increase local content.
5. ISP still can't feel the difference between Transit & Peering. They
are asking for IX connectivity to there IIG (Transit Provider) and lots
of packages are going on in market. I think you understand the point.

For GGC/Akamai or other CDN we have to meet certain criteria and there
are dependencies. But there are something which is within our control
but still missing. Finger cross...and hope for the best.

-Pappu

On 11/23/13, 12:30 PM, Simon Sohel Baroi / IIG-ITC / Sr.Manager /
01678618243 / wrote:
> Really agreed with Pappu vai's comment. Finanacial thing is the biggest
> issue.
> 
> Roman vai, Peering through ITC is not possible. As Bharti and Tata
> forcefully bundle the price with IP transit. You can connect with the CDN
> operator ot IX directly. But they will charge you IPLC and IP transit
> together. So, peering become more costly solution.
> 
> Regarding Global cache. I talked with Akamai. Their cach is very big and
> running in 2 places in Bangladesh. But they want to connect them with BDIX.
> 
> Simon.
> 
> 
> 
> On Saturday, November 23, 2013, Mohibul Hasib Mahmud wrote:
> 
>>
>> My personal observation is we should work for more local peering and
>> global cache locally in the form of CDN ( global CDN like Akamai) to
>> improve end user experience.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Hasib
>> BRACNet
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Nurul Islam Roman <nurul at apnic.net<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'nurul at apnic.net');>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>> What is something else :).
>>>
>>> Is it more peering? Does it worth peering with IPLC?  Or should we
>>> advocate more local peering and bring global cache locally?  I have got
>>> positive comments in BD though regarding peering with IPLC (specially end
>>> user experience) and also price perspective. What is the community thought
>>> on this? BIG FAT vs Good quality? Thanks Simon for bringing this. :)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Roman
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23/11/13 4:52 AM, "Fakrul Alam" <fakrul at bdhub.com <javascript:_e({},
>>> 'cvml', 'fakrul at bdhub.com');>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This been tricky. There are two aspects; financial & technical.
>>>> Technically it's been great to have big names like PCCW, HGC, HKIX,
>>>> Telstra, NTT, AT&T; but you need to find out whether it's been feasible
>>>> financially when:
>>>>
>>>> 1. You have 30++ IIG in the market.
>>>> 2. BSCCL half circuit price is roughly 80% of your total b/w cost for
>>>> SMW4.
>>>> 3. 10% revenue share with BTRC.
>>>> 4. Competitive market where price win in all aspect.
>>>> 5. ITC holding IIG license (I know there will be lot of arguments)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> -Pappu
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/22/13, 9:17 PM, Simon Sohel Baroi / IIG-ITC / Sr.Manager /
>>>> 01678618243 / wrote:
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think so many topic is going on. I want to add another one. This is
>>>>> really important as all of us want to have a good internet in
>>>>> Bangladesh.
>>>>>
>>>>> Before the ITC Connectivity comes to Bangladesh. We found MANGO and
>>> BTCL
>>>>> connected with different Tire-1 IP Transit Providers.
>>>>> But the number were limited to TIS, Bharti, Singtel, TM. As the price
>>>>> was
>>>>> really high, then people couldn't tell anything about the transit
>>>>> provider.
>>>>> I found MANGO sometimes added some new name in their list. But BTCL
>>>>> didn't,
>>>>> as expected. Now the new player, BSCCL is connected only with TIS.
>>>>>
>>>>> When ITC comes, the scenario become worst. The internet cost reduced
>>> 82%
>>>>> and all of us get connected with TATA and Bharti.
>>>>> As the big borthers wont allow the ITC provider to go with IPLC and go
>>>>> to
>>>>> other providers. The price is binded with their IP Transit. Some kind
>>> of
>>>>> IPLC kinle IPTransit FREE.
>>>>>
>>>>> All of us Bharti and TATA - with big big pipe. When a client ping from
>>>>> the
>>>>> laptop, they have to pass atleast one of them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Don't you think, we are missing some good things ? ( Big names like
>>>>> PCCW,
>>>>> HGC, HKIX, Telstra, NTT, AT&T etc ) *
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Don't you think, we are giving client a very bad internet experience
>>> ?*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *OR*
>>>>> *Getting Google within 70ms is more than enough for the client.*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think - BIG FAT Pipe with INDIA  - or -  GOOD Transit
>>>>> Providers
>>>>> - or - Something else. ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> - with regards
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> SIMON
>>>>> *( Apu da and Amin vai, please don't get me wrong as I have used
>>> MANGO's
>>>>> name without your permission )*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nog mailing list
>>>>> nog at bdnog.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'nog at bdnog.org');>
>>>>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nog mailing list
>>>> nog at bdnog.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'nog at bdnog.org');>
>>>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nog mailing list
>>> nog at bdnog.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'nog at bdnog.org');>
>>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nog mailing list
> nog at bdnog.org
> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
> 