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

Sat Nov 23 14:08:46 BDT 2013

Dear Hasib Bhai,

I think we are missing one point...."hosting content in BDIX". As far as
I know...BDIX won't give you hosting/collocation service; it only help
you to do the local peering. It's ISP / Hosting provider who bring out
the content and facilitates it's to IX.

Regarding "connectivity between IIG" is pretty messy :-). Connecting 30+
IIG?? Think we need to consider IX for IIG also :-) As per IIG Guideline:

9.07: For domestic internet traffic, all ISPs and BWAs will be connected
with Nationla Internet Exchanges(s) (NIX), which shall operate on a
peering basis. IIG shall also be connected to NIX if so directed by the
Commission as and when needed.
9.08: IIGs shall have interconnection among themselves. PoPs of
different IIGs shall have interconnection among themselves.

So there is no legal issue; only awareness. Correct me if I am wrong.

--
Pappu

On 11/23/13, 1:43 PM, Mohibul Hasib Mahmud wrote:
> I am agree with Simon Bhai. I am using lots of issues with BDIX specially
> since I am taking full BGP routing table from Internet, I am facing lot of
> issues connecting other peers in the BDIX. Some of the issues I have
> already discussed with Sumon Bhai. May be Simon Bhai also can remember.
> 
> I also agree with Pappu Bhai and I have no disagreements. I would like to
> add few things.
> 
> Regarding point 2 I think we need to raise awareness also need to
> understand why they do not want to connect to BDIX. Then I think we can
> find out a plan.
> 
> Regarding point 3 my comment is if somebody wants to host in google let
> them do it. Later may be we can ask google to put a server at BDIX.
> 
> Regarding point 3 content issue. It will not solve overnight. We need to
> support whatever initiative is currently available. Things like we could
> host Khan Academy Bangla lessons in the BDIX. So that other content
> providers will be benefited.
> 
> Besides these points I would like to raise another issue. We need
> connectivity between IIGs. I think this is the first thing. I don't know
> the legal issues but if there is any than we need to take initiative to
> make regulator understand the issue.
> 
> 
> Thanks
> Hasib
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Simon Sohel Baroi / IIG-ITC / Sr.Manager /
> 01678618243 / <simon.baroi at fiberathome.net> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Pappu Vai,
>>
>> Some very important point you haven mentioned.
>>
>> One main issue comes is the IX. As per our discussion there are so many
>> routing level issue in the IX. Even from F at H, we couldn't connect with
>> them, due to the hassle we have to take to manage the prefixes.
>>
>> I want to give a proposal. Can we sit next week at your office, with the
>> people of BDIX to solve the routing issue. I will try to bring SUMON vai,
>> as he has a huge contribution for this and from the planning stage he was
>> with BDIX.
>>
>> Lets sit and resolve the issue. In Phase-2 we will sit for the Chaching
>> issue.
>>
>> - with regards
>>
>> SIMON
>>
>> *P.S : a small room with 20 people can sit is enough with a board.*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Fakrul Alam <fakrul at bdhub.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nog mailing list
>>> nog at bdnog.org
>>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Simon Sohel Baroi  *|  Sr. Manager, Technology  |  PICO  |   ITC - IIG  |
>> Cell : +880-1678-618243, +880-181-7022207  |  Desk : +880-9666776677
>> Ext-1031  |
>> Mail : simon.baroi at pico.net.bd <simon.baroi at fiberathome.net>  |  Skype :
>> tx.fttx  |
>>
>>
>> * Reduce. Reuse. Recycle. Respect. It's the little things that really can
>> make a difference. *
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nog mailing list
>> nog at bdnog.org
>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>
>>
> 