On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:10:32PM -0400, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Clayton Zekelman wrote:
Just wondering aloud if an ISP that did have commercial interest could run a non-member driven exchange point successfully as long as they had pricing and policies that were similar to member driven exchange points.
Verrrry interesting that you raise that.
IIRC, Albuquerque has NMIX which I think was setup as for-profit. (John Brown are you still here?) Well over a decade ago now, my recollection is fuzzy. I don't recall the reasoning in choosing for-profit over nont-for-profit.
NMIX was a group of NM ISPs on a shared router at (last of?) the local feeders into what was once WestNet in the NSF days. It had a local NNTP server and (I believe) a couple of other services. It was useful back in the days when you could plumb some T1s to an AGS+ and make people happy. Mr. Brown's attempt at an exchange (IXNM) lasted about 8 years, and can probably be counted as an example of failure for such a model. The political side overwhelmed any technical advantage in Albuquerque. While it never became an importan IX, from the outside it looked like it was a successful bandwidth co-op with several local ISPs buying from it and benefiting from the local connectivity. Perhaps others can make a go at it? ----------- IXNM Opening e-mail --------------------- Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 09:45:27 -0700 From: "John M. Brown" <john@chagres.net> To: 'John Osmon' <josmon@rigozsaurus.com> Subject: IXNM goes live Friday 30-Jan-03 ----------- IXNM Ending e-mail --------------------- Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 02:51:33 +0000 From: John Brown <john@citylinkfiber.com> To: "1st-Mile-NM" <1st-mile-nm@mailman.dcn.org> Subject: [1st-mile-nm] IXNM End of an Era, death due to stupid politics.