Ed- Sorry for the delay in posting a response; there were issues with the nanog-post list. Who created that thing anyway ;-) At 03:09 PM 4/15/99 -0400, etignor@rhsmith.umd.edu wrote:

I would like to know what net professionals think about the future of NAPs & IXPs.

Given UUNET's inclination to peer only with national backbone providers, what is the future of settlement free peering arrangements?

Will non-profit, cooperative organizations that require multilateral

For what it's worth...I just finished a paper that highlights the trade offs between the direct circuit interconnect model and the exchange point interconnection model for ISPs. The paper discusses the operations and financial models (taking into account the circuit costs, cost of exchange participation, cost of dark fiber, etc.) and the implications of these strategies across the # of interconnection participants and bandwidth utilization between the participants. To cut to the chase, the major points from the paper: 1) For ISP interconnection, direct circuit interconnection is financially attractive for low #s of connections (O(5)) of relatively low bandwidth (DS-3/OC-3). This is due to the fact that ISPs typically pay only half of the cost for the direct circuits between each other while they pay the full freight for the big pipe into the exchange. ISPs may want to use the exchange for a POP, but barring use like that, if all you want to do is exchange traffic with these other 4 folks into the foreseeable future, the direct circuit interconnect model makes some sense. 2) As the bandwidth and # of interconnections grow, the exchange point interconnection model proves much more scalable for two reasons: First, as bandwidth grows between participants, ISPs are able to aggregate interconnection traffic over increasingly large pipe back to their cloud, yielding potentially significant economies of scale. The direct circuit interconnection does not provide for this aggregation since the pipes are destined to different plances. Secondly, operationally, fewer backhoes in an exchange, fewer local loop providers to troubleshoot, etc. The greater the dependence on interconnection, the more hardened you want that interconnection environment. 3) Several of the exchanges also provide for the centralization of content allowing additional transit sales revenue that potentially dwarf the cost savings highlighted above for interconnection. The direct circuit interconnect model doesn't allow for this additional revenue opportunity. 4) The analysis finds that facilities-based ISPs win big since (being able to exploit WDM technologies) they can seamlessly grow the pipe(s) into the exchange while the direct circuit interconnection model can't take advantage of this level of aggregation. IMHO, these are the most compelling reasons the IXP will be around for some time. I can make the white paper with the plots and data available to you if you like. peering to

participate (LINX) survive or thrive going forward, or will we see more for profit NAPs run by Sprint and co. run the non-profits out of business?

There are some scale issues that come into play that non-profits have to grapple with. For example, the resources required to build and operate a commercial grade operations environment from scratch (building close to fiber, HVAC, Generators, UPSes, Power, Security Systems, 24/7 Staffing, etc.) with sufficient redundancy excludes most non-profits from at least the high end of the market. Part of the challenge is achieving the critical mass to take advantage of economies of scale to compete. Another issue is, even if a non-profit could, what would be the motivation to expend the capital? Is it in their charter for a non-profit organization to do so, and why would that non-profit organization want to compete against a for-profit doing the same thing? In the US, IRS regulatory issues pop up too, and the tax exempt status may be challenged if too much revenue is generated in this new line of the business.

Will co-operative IXPs proliferate in regional markets? Will this give small ISPs, acting collectively, more leverage with the larger carriers (Exodus and GTE )?

I know these aren't truly operational question, but peering and transit is an issue that will have an impact on the international infrastructure and may result in increased regulation in the future. Are there other lists where people might have some thoughts about these issues?

The answers to these two are too long (and contentious) to answer here. Since you're in Maryland anyway, I am chairing a panel (with Dave Diaz, Bill Manning, and Dave Rand) in a few weeks at ISPCON in Baltimore that will discuss several of these topics. We'll be focusing on definitions and highlighting experiences in the field. This might be of interest to you and we can talk off-line there if you want. Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------- William B. Norton <wbn@equinix.com> +1 650.298.0400 x2225 Equinix Director of Business Development