[bdNOG] IX and Local Peering

• Previous message: [bdNOG] BIG FAT Pipe with INDIA - or - GOOD Transit Providers - or - Something else
• Next message: [bdNOG] IX and Local Peering
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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> 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> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nog mailing list
>> nog at bdnog.org
>> http://mailman.bdnog.org/mailman/listinfo/nog
>>
> 

• Previous message: [bdNOG] BIG FAT Pipe with INDIA - or - GOOD Transit Providers - or - Something else
• Next message: [bdNOG] IX and Local Peering
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]