[bdNOG] IX and Local Peering

Biplob biplob at btslink.net
Mon Nov 25 09:47:14 BDT 2013


Dear BDNOG

pls remove the Email address (biplob at btslink.net) for your Group & add
please biplobkanti at yahoo.com


Regards
Biplob






> I am wondering why leading telcos are note connected with IX or not
> feeling interested to do so. Now we have 3G; there will be more data
> traffic. Now I want my smart phone to register with my ISP SIP Server
> for IPTSP Service. As we know SIP is blocked from IIG (I know there are
> some way around..dushto loker kaaj); if telco is not connected with IX I
> can't do so..right?
>
> ---
> Pappu
> On 11/24/13, 12:42 PM, Md. Mahbubul Alam Reyad wrote:
>> Hi Pappu Bhai
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for concerning on the local content enriching and to change to
>> subject.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think we need to focus on the followings:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.       To fix out the current issues (ODF scope, Available Gig-ports,
>> Flexible Prefix announcement, security mechanism in IX peer etc.) in
>> BDIX so that the non-connected ISP/BWA/Telco/Others get interested to
>> connect.
>>
>> 2.       To workout for NIX development. (don't know whether the license
>> are issued yet or not)
>>
>> 3.       To increase awareness among the Banks, Corporate house, SOHO,
>> individuals to keep their web/mail/applications contents locally.
>> Because I believe now in Bangladesh there are some standard data centers
>> / ISPs who can ensure power, space, internet, content security.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sincerely Yours
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Md. Mahbubul Alam Reyad
>>
>> Assistant Manager
>>
>> CORE-IP Network || Technology
>>
>> Cell: +880 1976672281 || Skype: new_reyad
>>
>> www.qubee.com.bd
>>
>> T +88 02 8812113 || F +88 02 8812115
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nog-bounces at bdnog.org [mailto:nog-bounces at bdnog.org] On Behalf Of
>> Fakrul Alam
>> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 2:32 PM
>> To: nog at bdnog.org
>> Subject: [bdNOG] IX and Local Peering
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, Hasib Bhai; it's also possible. Regarding NIX; well no comments :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> By the way I have changed the Subject as the topic changed to something
>> else.
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Pappu
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/23/13, 2:19 PM, Mohibul Hasib Mahmud wrote:
>>
>>> Pappu Bhai,
>>
>>>
>>
>>> I know currently BDIX not providing hosting space. It is my proposal
>>
>>> that if some content mutually benefited to all can we put them in the
>>
>>> BDIX depending on consensus among the BDIX members.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> IX for IIG also good thing because by that we could also save foreign
>>
>>> currency.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> I was just wondering if there is policy in place why NIX is not
>>> happening.
>>
>>> What are the road blocks.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Hasib
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Fakrul Alam
>>> <fakrul at bdhub.com<mailto:fakrul at bdhub.com>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>>> 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<mailto: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<mailto: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<http://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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:nog at bdnog.org>
>>
>>>>>>>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>
>>>>>>>>
>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>>>>>> nog mailing list
>>
>>>>>>> nog at bdnog.org<mailto: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<mailto:simon.baroi at pico.net.bd>
>>>>>> <simon.baroi at fiberathome.net<mailto: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<mailto:nog at bdnog.org>
>>
>>>>>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>>> nog mailing list
>>
>>>> nog at bdnog.org<mailto:nog at bdnog.org>
>>
>>>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> nog mailing list
>>
>> nog at bdnog.org<mailto: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
>
>



More information about the nog mailing list