[AusNOG] Domestic Peering WAS: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?

[Chris Ricks]

$15 / Mbit? Where do I sign?

On 09/11/12 15:46, Joshua D'Alton wrote:
> If AAPT are offering deals down to the $15/Mbit level I'd think
> reliability is probably not a great concern, even if you were a
> business grade ISP. Without knowing their exact situation it would
> make sense that them charging more for transit probably wouldn't help
> reliability as much as people would think. With players like Exetel
> iiNet and TPG gathering transit from them, you can be fairly sure that
> 'transit' is still domestic for AAPT, more than likely just to another
> Go4. In other words, cheap.
>
> It is certainly needed to help reduce the number of situations where a
> provider will sign with someone like NTT for their transit, terminate
> it in Sydney, and let NTT do whatever they want with it after it
> leaves AU shores, since by that point it is going to be high-latency
> regardless. And for things like Office365 online, latency to SG really
> doesn't matter.
>
> On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Chris Ricks
> <chris.ricks at securepay.com.au <mailto:chris.ricks at securepay.com.au>>
> wrote:
>
>     A few years ago, I was speaking to James Linton and Glen Ward from
>     Exetel about some of our services.
>
>     Glen was ex-Optus and mentioned that the peering arrangement was
>     more of
>     a "swap" than straight settlement-free, whatever that means.
>
>     Regarding AAPT, they seem to be more aggressively competing for
>     transit
>     deals at present. Exetel seemingly have the majority of their transit
>     capacity with them, iiNet and TPG have fairly decent transit with them
>     and quite a few people I've spoken to are getting approaches from
>     them.
>
>     That said, they'd need to sort out their reliability issues to get
>     decent traction in the market one would think.
>
>
>     On 09/11/12 15:26, Sam Silvester wrote:
>     > On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Mark Newton
>     <newton at atdot.dotat.org <mailto:newton at atdot.dotat.org>> wrote:
>     >> So I think the best path out of this mess is to lobby the ACCC to
>     >> repeal their GoF decision, to de-regulate peering.
>     > I agree with this. Once you are regulating this, it becomes
>     > 'exclusive' and thus less about the 'value' that Brad, Mark and
>     myself
>     > have mentioned and far more about looking to the Govt for direction.
>     >
>     > Looking at the various IXes around Australia, it seems that if it
>     > makes sense (cost, latency, <insert your particular definition of
>     > 'value' here>), network operators are by and large (yes, corporates
>     > could be more involved, but still) making good choices about
>     > interconnecting via either MPLA or bilateral links.
>     >
>     > I wonder - what would happen to AAPT's peering if the current GoF
>     > decision went away?
>     >
>     > Sam
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > 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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20121109/d765bd41/attachment.html>