Re: NANOG67 - Tipping point of community and sponsor bashing?

[Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>]

I agree that the SIX is a fine organization, but the framework of the organization has little to do with the members 
getting screwed over. A non-profit donation-based IX that doesn't produce results could be screwing its "customers" 
over more than a MRC-based for-profit IX that does produce. 

I also think that the individual merits of an organization or business model is pretty astray from the OP's original 
point (correct or not) about using the NANOG presentation platform for thinly veiled personal agenda. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 



Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 


----- Original Message -----

From: "Eric Kuhnke" <eric.kuhnke () gmail com> 
To: nanog () nanog org 
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2016 12:43:13 AM 
Subject: Re: NANOG67 - Tipping point of community and sponsor bashing? 

Re: Item #3 there, the Google Docs spreadsheet with the IX costs... Scroll 
all the way down to the bottom in $/Mbps and you will find the SIX. 

Everyone in the Pacific NW should appreciate the excellent work that the 
SIX does. It's a nonprofit with transparency in its finances, a health cash 
reserve for emergencies and new equipment and meets very stringent uptime 
and reliability requirements. 

ISP entities and enterprise end users 1000 km away from the SIX in random 
locations in British Columbia, Montana, Utah and other western US states 
benefit from it. People who have no idea what an IX is or how it functions 
have better, faster and lower cost last mile Internet access thanks to 
their local small ISP that has had the foresight to purchased a transport 
circuit to Seattle to reach the SIX. 

It is worth mentioning that the fine people at the NWAX in Portland are 
working to build on the example set by the SIX, and are a 501(c)6 
nonprofit: http://www.nwax.net/ 


On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net> wrote: 

> > On Jun 14, 2016, at 11:12 AM, Matt Peterson <matt () peterson org> wrote: 
> >
> > This week at NANOG67, a presentation was given early on that did not 
> > reflect well for our community at large. 
>
> I think that the data presented was interesting but the style of 
> the presenter and tone could have been different. It seemed 
> to be a variant of “The Rent is Too Damn High”[1] while it can 
> be interesting, there wasn’t a complete talk there IMHO. 
>
> The feedback mechanism for this is honestly the survey[2]. I’m confident 
> that the PC will take this input seriously and work with presenters 
> in this regard. 
>
> The IXP cost sheet[3] that is being maintained by Job I think gives an 
> idea of the peering vs transit costs assuming various bitrates and 
> list prices. 
>
> The fates of IXPs and their roles will naturally resolve itself through 
> market economics I suspect. 
>
> - Jared 
>
> - snip - links - snip - 
> 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent_Is_Too_Damn_High_Party 
> 2 - https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog67/survey 
> 3 - 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18ztPX_ysWYqEhJlf2SKQQsTNRbkwoxPSfaC6ScEZAG8/edit#gid=0