[AusNOG] Carrier Independent Peering Exchange

[Daniel Hooper]

AECIX

Aus East Coast Internet Exchange

Given that it's unlikely to see many WA based providers on it with the cost of backhaul.

-Dan
From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Matthew Moyle-Croft
Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 10:18 AM
To: Sean K. Finn
Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Carrier Independent Peering Exchange

APE = Auckland Peering Exchange.

MMC

On 17/12/2009, at 12:46 PM, Sean K. Finn wrote:


APE.

Australian Peering Exchange.

Or APEx.

Australian Peering EXchange.

-----Original Message-----
From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net> [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Mark Smith
Sent: Thursday, 17 December 2009 12:07 PM
To: Steve Baxter
Cc: ausnog at ausnog.net<mailto:ausnog at ausnog.net>
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Carrier Independent Peering Exchange

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:17:30 +1000
"Steve Baxter" <steve at thebaxters.com<mailto:steve at thebaxters.com>> wrote:



AWIX - Australian Wide Internet Exchange

Sure - you could hook it up with the modern equivilent of 256k frame
relay!

I do not apologise if I sound cynical but having been down this road
many times before I really suggest that all who look at it consider the
history of what has been before else you may be doomed to repeat
failures.


>From what I understand, they collapsed because of disagreements between
members.

A trusted third party who has a commercial motivation to keep everybody
happy would seem to be a better model. I suspect it's been done quite
successfully before. I suggest not calling it Public Internet
Peering Exchange though.

If the ISPs around Australia do want to try to go down this path again,
I'd suggest setting up something like a separate commercial entity that
has it's own financial/commercial agenda and management etc. that the
ISPs have shareholdings in and maintain an arms-length relationship
with.

A commercial structure may not be the best one for this, others such
as a trust structure might be an alternative. I think the key thing to
ensure with the possible structure is that there is an overriding tie
breaker if disputes between shareholding ISPs arise, with "whats best
for the profitability of the peering company" being an example of one.


SB


Your Thoughts?


--
This message was scanned by ESVA and is believed to be clean.

_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net<mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
_______________________________________________
AusNOG mailing list
AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog

--
Matthew Moyle-Croft
Peering Manager and Team Lead - Commercial and DSLAMs
Internode /Agile
Level 5, 162 Grenfell Street, Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Email: mmc at internode.com.au<mailto:mmc at internode.com.au>    Web: http://www.on.net<http://www.on.net/>
Direct: +61-8-8228-2909                        Mobile: +61-419-900-366
Reception: +61-8-8228-2999        Fax: +61-8-8235-6909

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20091217/6f6f5f7c/attachment.html>