nanog mailing list archives

Re: Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet


From: Martin Hannigan <hannigan () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 12:16:44 -0400

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:

New IXP founders typically contact our staff

wow!  i did not know we had the ixp god here!  lemme go back to my
camera-ready dreadline. :)

- Three or more participants
- Shared layer-2 switch fabric across which participants peer with
  each other, exchanging customer routes
- New participation is not too rigorously constrained (at least a
  domestic ISP new market entrant should be able to participate)

imiho, it is also nice if non-isp folk can participate, content, etc.


It provides for much more financial benefit for the participants if they
can. Pulling that traffic off of the wire at a N:N ratio usually results in
enough of a cost savings to be a win-win for both.



- Participants do not receive a metered-rate bill based on utilization

that's a new one.  i am not sure i understand why.  just seems a finer
grained case of 100mb for $1, 1g for $5, and 10g for $20 or whatever.


I completely agree.




and i would add carrier neutrality, i can haul fiber from anyone into
the exchange.  this is pretty critical in the exchanges where i have
played.

randy



Exchanges boxed in by incumbents and monopolies should absolutely be
contacting content sources directly (peering@) to determine if there is a
way that they can participate in the community directly. In most cases I
can definitively tell you that there is likely a way to resolve the
business issues that are roadblocks for both parties and to return
substantial benefit to the exchange and it's community. That train left the
station a few years ago. See Curacao.

Best Regards,

-M<


Current thread: