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

[Mark Smith]

In effect, you're demanding government intervention to fix (lower) prices. You want to be very careful in demanding that governments fix prices, because once they do, there is no incentive for anybody to price any lower. IOW, it removes the urge to take business from competitors using pricing as the tool. People will move to trying to compete by providing other value added services, because they can't lower their prices, which may be fine, but if the underlying item is a commodity one, that stops it following the traditional trend of getting cheaper over time. As it is a commodity item, there may be very few opportunities to value add.

High prices from one supplier creates an "umbrella" for other suppliers to price under. Bigpond having high prices for so many years created the foothold for other providers to undercut and establish themselves (them moving to be competitive in the last 12 or so months is quite significant from this perspective). High prices on cable systems created the opportunity for PPC and other ones that are in planning. That competition has caused the price of transit to drop across the whole industry.



>________________________________
> From: Joshua D'Alton <joshua at railgun.com.au>
>To: "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net" <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net> 
>Sent: Tuesday, 13 November 2012 2:45 PM
>Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Domestic Peering WAS: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?
> 
>
>Cost of transit from Go4 in AU is definitely > backhaul to US/JP + US/JP local transit). Latest calculations from a 10Gbit perspective put it at ~45k +~10k
>
>
>On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Peter Childs <PChilds at internode.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Is this issue perhaps that without being able to demonstrate that a dominant carrier is using its position of dominance, through action or inaction, to stifle competition that you aren't really going to see any regulator take any steps to resolve peering concerns?
>>
>>
>>Being completely unaware of any of the commercials or logistics does the price of transit in Australia > price-of-transit-in-not-AU + cost-of-getting-that-back-to-AU ?
>>
>>
>>Does the fact that these large players won't 'peer' with smaller players prevent competition in the market?
>>
>>
>>
>>From: Zone Networks - Joel <joel at zonenetworks.com.au>
>>Date: Tuesday, 13 November 2012 11:53 AM
>>To: 'Joshua D'Alton' <joshua at railgun.com.au>, "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net" <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>
>>
>>Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Domestic Peering WAS: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?
>>
>>
>>
>>Sean’s idea is not a bad…
>> 
>>but I reckon the end user’s, cable/adsl customer etc need to be educated first.. about what GO4 is doing to domestic traffic
>> 
>>most gamers understand latency etc…
>>if you going to route GO4 traffic to US, gamers will be your best friends if you want to cause a shit storm…
>>They will give GO4 support hell…
>> 
>>Gamers whinge if they is an increase in latency by 5-10 ms… we are talking about 100ms+ here
>> 
>>To my knowledge most of the major game networks are hosted outside of GO4, except for Game Arena
>>That is including major game releases from the likes of EA Sports which are hosted privately
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>From:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of Joshua D'Alton
>>Sent: Tuesday, 13 November 2012 11:43 AM
>>To: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
>>Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Domestic Peering WAS: Vocus peering traffic missingfrom PIPE-IX?
>> 
>>Well its really just economics, supply and demand (which is low in our case).
>>
>>All the Telstra gamer customers will care about latency to their game servers, but I guess the majority of customers probably won't be impacted by latency :/ If it was done before, when and to what result, and why isn't it still happening if it saves costs
?
>>On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:00 AM, Mark Prior <mrp at mrp.net> wrote:
>>On 12/11/12 8:55 PM, Joshua D'Alton wrote:
>>Anyway... Perhaps greater cooperation amongst providers in AU would be
>>able to breach the Reach (har har) and achieve the sort of pricing that
>>you see on trans-atlantic (transit basically) links::
>>http://www.hiberniaatlantic.com/documents/ProjectKelvin-PricingMarch20111_000.pdf
>> 
>>I'll leave it to Bevin to explain cable economics 101 :-)
>> 
>>>Seans Idea of pumping all the traffic overseas for a week to pwn the Go4
>>>is a great idea, what would be better is the establishment of a
>>>"not-for-profit" consortium that got together to bully the Go4 into
>>>submission. The best thing about it is even the dedicated server
>>>providers that have them used by gamers won't be bearing much of a brunt
>>>as it will be T$lstra who has to explain why latency to next door
>>>neighbour on iiNet is being routed via SJ while iiNet customer enjoys
>>>low latency to 90% of providers who do choose to peer. Or at least that
>>>would be the idea (trollface), maybe someone experienced could think of
>>>the actual ramifications and possibilities..
>> 
>>You make the flawed assumption that they care about latency to other providers. Also been there and tried it.
>>
>>Mark.
>>
>>
>>  
>
>_______________________________________________
>AusNOG mailing list
>AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>