On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Ran Atkinson wrote:
This is another reason to use Guam for an interconnect. Guam is part of the USA and so telecommunications is already deregulated. (A side benefit for US citizens living on Guam is that Guam is the only place in the universe where one's income is not subject to US Federal Income Tax, go figure :-).
On Oct 11, 10:35am, Robert Mathews-ICICX wrote: % Hello Fellow Electronic Colleagues: % % <looking around a room> Can anyone say Hawaii? :) Hawaii does have lots of fiber. Monetary costs for circuits between Guam and Hawaii are not ignorable. Also, back-haul all the way to Hawaii for an intra-Asia interconnect causes a significant increase in latency when compared with a Guam-based interconnect. (No, I've never been to Guam and I don't own any land or fiber there :-) Ran rja@cisco.com --
On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Ran Atkinson wrote:
Hawaii does have lots of fiber. Monetary costs for circuits between Guam and Hawaii are not ignorable. Also, back-haul all the way to Hawaii for an intra-Asia interconnect causes a significant increase in latency when compared with a Guam-based interconnect. (No, I've never been to Guam and I don't own any land or fiber there :-)
Adding to: The cost of transiting bits beyond CONUS to the Pacific is still quite significant. TA circuit costs come to mind in comparison. I can remember it being NOT all too long ago, when a DS1 from HI to CA was being priced roughly around US$56K/Mo. For Intra-Asia applications.. Indeed, Hawaii would not be the appropriate spot. However, when someone considers having to enable a tie-in to CONUS from certain parts of the Pacific, Hawaii might appear as a natural choice.
Ran rja@cisco.com
All the best, Robert. ICICX. ------
Hawaii does have lots of fiber. Monetary costs for circuits between Guam and Hawaii are not ignorable. Also, back-haul all the way to Hawaii for an intra-Asia interconnect causes a significant increase in latency when compared with a Guam-based interconnect. (No, I've never been to Guam and I don't own any land or fiber there :-)
My Big Map o' Fiber(*) shows the HAW-5 cable going from L.A.-ish (probably San Diego?) to Hawaii, and then continuing on to Guam and then Japan as TPC-5. The Pacrimeast cable leaves Hawaii bound for Wellington, NZ, and the Pacrimwest cable leaves Guam bound for Sydney/Canberra. Tasman-2 then connects Sydney/Canberra with Wellington. Both Pacrim cables and Tasman-2 are a LOT skinnier on the map than TPC-5 or HAW-5. Why does it have to be an either-or? Topologically, it looks like both Hawaii and Guam would both make sensible exchange points. For the west side of the Pacific Rim, though, Guam is looking pretty good from a U.S territory perspective.
From an infrastructure perspective, though, Japan looks hard to beat. The pipes to Singapore/Jakarta/Australia, Guam/Hawaii/L.A.-ish, and somewhere in Oregon (?) all meet there. Ignoring regulations, tariff issues, etc., of course.
Stephen (*) Telecommunications Map of the World, produced by The Petroleum Economist, Ltd., London, and Telegeography, Inc., Washington D.C., in associated with Ing Barings. Truly a stunning map, and it comes with a thousand pages of paragraphs with circles and arrows explaining what it is.
Hawaii and Guam would both make sensible exchange points. For the west side of the Pacific Rim, though, Guam is looking pretty good from a U.S territory perspective.
From an infrastructure perspective, though, Japan looks hard to beat. The pipes to Singapore/Jakarta/Australia, Guam/Hawaii/L.A.-ish, and somewhere in Oregon (?) all meet there. Ignoring regulations, tariff issues, etc., of course.
Stephen
My copy of said map does -not- cover planned new fiber runs. Singapore and Japan are both well positioned as is HongKong for some of the new stuff I've heard coming from the C&W coop and a planned ATT/KDD/PRC-MPT venture. Oh... btw, the "wnog" would really be the IEPG. iepg@iepg.org Or, since this has a distinctly PacRim flavor, APOPS. -- --bill
On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Stephen Stuart wrote:
Why does it have to be an either-or? Topologically, it looks like both Hawaii and Guam would both make sensible exchange points.
Stephen: Your point above - is 'precisely' one, to which I had eluded to earlier in my post..
For the west side of the Pacific Rim, though, Guam is looking pretty good from a U.S territory perspective.
Indeed.. DEPENDING on which part of the Pacific, Hawaii and Guam have significant roles.
From an infrastructure perspective, though, Japan looks hard to beat. The pipes to Singapore/Jakarta/Australia, Guam/Hawaii/L.A.-ish, and somewhere in Oregon (?) all meet there. Ignoring regulations, tariff issues, etc., of course.
I am not sure if this CONVERGENCE of capacity as you indicate is really that much of a concern with respect to the placement of an exchange point -- at this moment in time. Being that capacity through these parts, is no longer a problem. Capacity - has NOT been a variable in this respect, for some short while. Adopted/Deployed pricing models on the other hand, still actively represent the problem area. Although, I must clarify that I am NOT implying that this is the only problem area.... :)
Stephen
Best, Robert. ICICX. -------
participants (4)
-
bmanning＠ISI.EDU -
rja＠cisco.com -
Robert Mathews-ICICX -
Stephen Stuart