|I'm looking to improve my connectivity into the AP region, in |a cost effective [i.e. for as little as possible :-)]. I have |ruled out buying transit as it doesn't help the issue that I'm |trying to resolve, so I was wondering if there was a location/IXP |in the AP region that would enable me to interconnect with |as many AP carriers as possible. sadly the best spot to interconnect is not in the AP region, its in Palo Alto. |Neil J. McRae - Alive and Kicking -- James
|I'm looking to improve my connectivity into the AP region, in |a cost effective [i.e. for as little as possible :-)]. I have |ruled out buying transit as it doesn't help the issue that I'm |trying to resolve, so I was wondering if there was a location/IXP |in the AP region that would enable me to interconnect with |as many AP carriers as possible.
sadly the best spot to interconnect is not in the AP region, its in Palo Alto.
And, it's cheaper to buy 45Mbps at a well negotiated rate from a major carrier in AU than to achieve the same amount of bandwidth with links around the country and peering in the key cities. In AP the best place to pick up carriers would be the IXs in HK or SG. HK is quite cheap to reach from both US and AU and the major telcos who won't peer in AU will peer in HK. I don't know what size player you have to be to get them to peer with you at the IX there though. If you want peering in AU, buy WorldCom (OzEmail). Continue the history (WCOM bought OzEmail when they couldn't get peering in AU, since OzEmail are one of the peering cartel; OzEmail bought Access1 for about the same reason). The big three in AU generally don't peer unless forced to by the ACCC (government competition commission). Surprised you haven't snapped them up yet James, I know they could do with a better regional POP network than the old OzEmaze POPs :-) David.
On 9/26/02 2:28 AM, "James Spenceley" <jrs@comindico.com.au> wrote:
|I'm looking to improve my connectivity into the AP region, in |a cost effective [i.e. for as little as possible :-)]. I have |ruled out buying transit as it doesn't help the issue that I'm |trying to resolve, so I was wondering if there was a location/IXP |in the AP region that would enable me to interconnect with |as many AP carriers as possible.
sadly the best spot to interconnect is not in the AP region, its in Palo Alto.
Is this really still true? In Japan there are 4 IXes I'm aware of (JPIX and NSPIXP-2 being the largest). In Hong Kong, HKIX is (last I heard) pretty popular. In Korea, I'm told there are quite a few Ixes. There is some intra-Asia meshing going on (including both carriers as well as efforts like ABONE). Is it still the case that to get from (say) Korea to Japan, the best path is through the US? Rgds, -drc
|I'm looking to improve my connectivity into the AP region, in |a cost effective [i.e. for as little as possible :-)]. I have |ruled out buying transit as it doesn't help the issue that I'm |trying to resolve, so I was wondering if there was a location/IXP |in the AP region that would enable me to interconnect with |as many AP carriers as possible.
sadly the best spot to interconnect is not in the AP region, its in Palo Alto.
Is this really still true?
Some big carriers that owns lots of transpacific capacity you will see them colocated in places like Palo Alto (PAIX) or Equinix LA. Therefore to increase their transit/peering capacity they will have to order just a cross connect. IMHO, it is a good and scalable approach and easy to manage. If you have a good customer base in Asia you should go and do "regional peering" in the local IXs (i.e KIX, HKIX, JPIX etc). If you want to be competitive in that market and keep your customers happy, IMHO you should go for this, otherwise as you stated, packets for intra Asia traffic will flow to the West Coast and then come back to Asia.
In Japan there are 4 IXes I'm aware of (JPIX and NSPIXP-2 being the largest). In Hong Kong, HKIX is (last I heard) pretty popular. In Korea, I'm told there are quite a few Ixes. There is some intra-Asia meshing going on (including both carriers as well as efforts like ABONE). Is it still the case that to get from (say) Korea to Japan, the best path is through the US?
Rgds, -drc
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 11:45:53AM -0400, German Martinez <gmartine@mafalda.opentransit.net> wrote:
|I'm looking to improve my connectivity into the AP region, in |a cost effective [i.e. for as little as possible :-)]. I have |ruled out buying transit as it doesn't help the issue that I'm |trying to resolve, so I was wondering if there was a location/IXP |in the AP region that would enable me to interconnect with |as many AP carriers as possible.
sadly the best spot to interconnect is not in the AP region, its in Palo Alto.
Is this really still true?
Some big carriers that owns lots of transpacific capacity you will see them colocated in places like Palo Alto (PAIX) or Equinix LA. Therefore to increase their transit/peering capacity they will have to order just a cross connect. IMHO, it is a good and scalable approach and easy to manage.
I would confirm GM's assertion. Also, if you have the luxury of caring more about a smaller set of large-capacity Tier1 private peers, there is some presence of AsiaPac providers doing this at Equinix SJ.
If you have a good customer base in Asia you should go and do "regional peering" in the local IXs (i.e KIX, HKIX, JPIX etc). If you want to be competitive in that market and keep your customers happy, IMHO you should go for this, otherwise as you stated, packets for intra Asia traffic will flow to the West Coast and then come back to Asia.
In Japan there are 4 IXes I'm aware of (JPIX and NSPIXP-2 being the largest). In Hong Kong, HKIX is (last I heard) pretty popular. In Korea, I'm told there are quite a few Ixes. There is some intra-Asia meshing going on (including both carriers as well as efforts like ABONE). Is it still the case that to get from (say) Korea to Japan, the best path is through the US?
HKIX seems pretty healthy: http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/hkix/stat/aggt/hkix-aggregate.html http://www.hkix.net/hkix/connected.html According to folks that have visited them, NSPIXP2 is more a legacy low-cost, ad-hoc, non-commercial style exchange, versus the tighter controlled commercial focus of JPIX and JPNAP. Anyone know of stats for Korean IXes or other major AsiaPac IXes? In english? Anyone have experience to share on which AsiaPac IXes are currently providing best success for minimizing costs of peering and backhaul? Cheers, -Lane
Rgds, -drc
At 01:37 PM 9/26/2002 -0700, Lane Patterson wrote:
I would confirm GM's assertion. Also, if you have the luxury of caring more about a smaller set of large-capacity Tier1 private peers, there is some presence of AsiaPac providers doing this at Equinix SJ.
Actually Equinix-Los Angeles has more Asian based Networks coming in for turn-up in October than any other region from details gathered this week. Chunghwa is in as of this week. SingTel, Japan Telecom, Hanaro, are on track for peer-ready in October. DACOM is considering, etc. It appears that JPNAP is growing very fast: http://www.jpnap.net/english/index.html <click on services, then traffic>. Rising from zero to 8G in a year is pretty steep. -ren, always pulling Los Angeles <G>
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 04:52:33PM -0400, ren wrote:
At 01:37 PM 9/26/2002 -0700, Lane Patterson wrote:
I would confirm GM's assertion. Also, if you have the luxury of caring more about a smaller set of large-capacity Tier1 private peers, there is some presence of AsiaPac providers doing this at Equinix SJ.
Actually Equinix-Los Angeles has more Asian based Networks coming in for turn-up in October than any other region from details gathered this week. Chunghwa is in as of this week. SingTel, Japan Telecom, Hanaro, are on track for peer-ready in October. DACOM is considering, etc.
NYIIX in NYC also has a large number of AP networks, probably more than anywhere else I've seen on the east coast. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
I would confirm GM's assertion. Also, if you have the luxury of caring more about a smaller set of large-capacity Tier1 private peers, there is some presence of AsiaPac providers doing this at Equinix SJ.
Actually Equinix-Los Angeles has more Asian based Networks coming in for turn-up in October than any other region from details gathered this week. Chunghwa is in as of this week. SingTel, Japan Telecom, Hanaro, are on track for peer-ready in October. DACOM is considering, etc.
so what does that make telehouse-la after all these years... chopped liver? there have been Plenty of asian isp's in los angeles for Quite a while now. there also seems to be a PAIX switch inside 1 Wilshire now. (mfn's chap.11 filing having sawn off any hope we had of opening PAIX-LA.) -- Paul Vixie
I'm not sure how much is supposed to be discussed about the paix la project but I know we're going to turn up peering there, meeting with our Paix sales person tomorrow. Still, Paix pao seems to have a lot of asian carriers. Most of which were very very open to peering there. On 29 Sep 2002, Paul Vixie wrote:
I would confirm GM's assertion. Also, if you have the luxury of caring more about a smaller set of large-capacity Tier1 private peers, there is some presence of AsiaPac providers doing this at Equinix SJ.
Actually Equinix-Los Angeles has more Asian based Networks coming in for turn-up in October than any other region from details gathered this week. Chunghwa is in as of this week. SingTel, Japan Telecom, Hanaro, are on track for peer-ready in October. DACOM is considering, etc.
so what does that make telehouse-la after all these years... chopped liver? there have been Plenty of asian isp's in los angeles for Quite a while now.
there also seems to be a PAIX switch inside 1 Wilshire now. (mfn's chap.11 filing having sawn off any hope we had of opening PAIX-LA.)
On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 08:36:02AM -0700, David Conrad wrote:
sadly the best spot to interconnect is not in the AP region, its in Palo Alto.
Is this really still true?
I would not be surprised to find that it is. Asia Pacific is an enormous region with lots of inconvenient ocean all over it. An in-region strategy which works for peering with Japan or Hong Kong or Korea is unlikely to put you close to a large number of New Zealand operators, to give an extreme example. Given the enormous scope of the question, the US west coast almost sounds like an effective common denominator *regardless* of the state of interconnection within the region, or the history of US-centric traffic demand and under-sea cable routes.
In Japan there are 4 IXes I'm aware of (JPIX and NSPIXP-2 being the largest). In Hong Kong, HKIX is (last I heard) pretty popular. In Korea, I'm told there are quite a few Ixes. There is some intra-Asia meshing going on (including both carriers as well as efforts like ABONE).
I think a question about the best place to peer within Asia is more likely to have interesting answers than the question about Asia Pacific. Joe
participants (10)
-
David Conrad -
David Luyer -
German Martinez -
James Spenceley -
Joe Abley -
Lane Patterson -
Paul Vixie -
ren -
Richard A Steenbergen -
Scott Granados