[bdNOG] FW: IX and Local Peering

Mon Nov 25 12:15:49 BDT 2013

Dear Philip,

Thanks for the in-depth inputs on this issue.

- SIMON

On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Philip Smith <pfsinoz at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Just to contribute my thoughts, for what they are worth... :-)
>
> Md. Mahbubul Alam Reyad said the following on 24/11/13 17:41 :
> >
> > 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.
>
> Yep, this is a priority. Certainly when BDIX started (I was around at
> the time ;-)), there was no restriction on who could join. I assume
> there is still no restriction today, right?
>
> As with most neutral IXes, as long as you have an ASN, and abide by
> simple decent good behaviour rules, joining the IX is the best thing a
> network operator can do. It is certainly much cheaper than paying
> transit prices for domestic traffic - you only pay towards the
> infrastructure of the IX, there are no traffic charges. So local
> bandwidth for local traffic becomes limited by the physical capacity to
> the IX, not by a bank balance.
>
> And note: network operator. IXes are not limited to commercial ISPs, but
> also connect other folks, whether academic, government, multinationals,
> content providers, etc.
>
> If there are network operators who aren't members, perhaps they haven't
> done the simple arithmetic? Or don't realise that end-users care about
> round trip times or QoS. All these things are vastly improved by
> connecting to an IX.
>
> > 2.       To workout for NIX development. (don’t know whether the license
> > are issued yet or not)
>
> I don't know anything about this (maybe someone can tell me more
> off-line), but why introduce another IX when there is already one which
> from my external view seems to be serving the purpose?
>
> > 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.
>
> Yup, datacentre opportunity!! It doesn't have to be at the Equinix
> scale, of course, but even a small secure room with a few racks and
> reliable power/access would go a long way to encourage more folks to
> host stuff locally. More local hosting, the bigger the opportunities,
> generating more content, resulting in a need for more local hosting.
> With the reduction in dependency on the external links, it improves the
> network for all. etc. :-)
>
> philip
> --
> _______________________________________________
> 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. *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.bdnog.org/pipermail/nog/attachments/20131125/5e404e6a/attachment.html>