From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from secmail.pch.net (secmail.pch.net [206.220.231.87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3DD93CB37 for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 19:02:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from secmail.pch.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by secmail.pch.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Tgqv92sm8z4xVVJ for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:02:13 -0800 (PST) Authentication-Results: secmail.pch.net (amavisd-new); dkim=pass reason="pass (just generated, assumed good)" header.d=pch.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=pch.net; h= x-mailer:to:references:message-id:date:in-reply-to:from:subject :mime-version:content-type; s=secmail_dkim; t=1708646532; x= 1711238533; bh=JY3gFMH+0DLq3RybI9qoAMM7lt/h8hPOPuCc0LPOjcM=; b=2 YDyrogZ19qBEc2jSgldiY3MkRrYN+wfQ22bcBKDPZdItyrt5KGry+bU9WX+q1je6 oTUJZah2aAL4xk90bPWDY49R38m/UtHH/TjdlIlAgkiHuotq/LiCEQxzuoF1MuM8 8NV4OenHF9Chk3+flaH01Sx1XcDNh0ebGXNB6/YW7+rZxQ9IhJT8KjvLpvAiKKmq lKWX5yonM1BOp5TLxqZ5a5fAfUZ+Vb6mZOIo0l+yn+ly3zGYry6W5pvSdZbCnoT9 IoHcagbs87R6rJ2VyCMK+nRNaGos/q4IeDaHPv40TzYxmeiddISrVFYWWUSkll0l 63zTjoVkr1fbpJxIaFr8A== X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at secmail.pch.net Received: from secmail.pch.net ([127.0.0.1]) by secmail.pch.net (secmail.pch.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id LlM2_qjrinje for ; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:02:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (itv-02 [69.166.14.6]) by secmail.pch.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Tgqv764JCz4xVTj; Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:02:11 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7648207F-09A4-49D3-9387-BF4906C9F0E4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.500.171.1.1\)) From: Bill Woodcock In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 01:02:09 +0100 Cc: Dave Taht , Brent Legg Message-Id: <337808DB-40C5-4FF7-A95A-BF13B6AB9993@pch.net> References: To: =?utf-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_as?= =?utf-8?Q?pects_heard_this_time!?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.500.171.1.1) Subject: Re: [NNagain] The Whys of the Wichita IXP Project X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 00:02:14 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7648207F-09A4-49D3-9387-BF4906C9F0E4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 8:02=E2=80=AFPM Brent Legg wrote: > Saying an IXP can be built for $8k is enormously confusing to many = policymakers Only if someone tries to confuse them by referring to a datacenter as an = IXP. So, please don=E2=80=99t do that. $8k is a reasonably-up-to-date = global average cost for new IXP formation. > Does it need to be a facility that networks can rely on to remain = =E2=80=9Cup=E2=80=9D in the wake of adverse events? Yes. Why? > Resilient from power outages? Yes. Why? > Resilient from cooling equipment failures? Yes. Why? > Resistant to wind damage? Yes. Why? > Is =E2=80=9Cbest effort=E2=80=9D good enough? No. Why? And what do you think is better than =E2=80=9Cbest?" > Then does it need to be professionally managed? Yes. Why? And this is really a big one. I know why Hunter needs it to be = managed by someone else to fit his model, but how would that advantage = anyone in Wichita? It=E2=80=99s perfectly ok for different people to = have fill different niches and have different business models. Hunter = likes neutral datacenters with a lot of interconnection, and I do too. = Having an IXP in such a datacenter is enormously advantageous to the = datacenter, and makes its financial outlook much better. Hunter is = trying to move fast and cover a lot of ground. Which is great. Solving = problems at scale is great. But he=E2=80=99s solving a datacenter = problem, not an IXP problem. The IXPs are simply a way of making it = more likely that the datacenters will thrive. Which is great. For the = datacenters. But if you=E2=80=99re trying to drop a hundred tiny = datacenters off the back of trucks, and you=E2=80=99re moving fast, and = you want an IXP in each one as soon as possible, doing the four to eight = months of work typically necessary to organically organize an IXP in = each location simply doesn=E2=80=99t scale. So, outsourcing this to = something like DE-CIX makes sense for Hunter. But it doesn=E2=80=99t = particularly make sense for DE-CIX, and it doesn=E2=80=99t particularly = make sense for Wichita, or any other specific community of network = operators. Will it work? In some places, sure. Roll the dice enough = times and you=E2=80=99ll win some of the time. But being one of many = bets, some of which will fail, isn=E2=80=99t particularly reassuring to = any specific community. As long as Hunter doesn=E2=80=99t make an = _exclusive_ agreement with DE-CIX, I don=E2=80=99t see this as = particularly problematic. But I=E2=80=99m not sure you appreciate what = a bad thing =E2=80=9Cprofessional management=E2=80=9D is for APBDC. = Just look at Manchester. > Where should it be built? Where a concentration of eyeball traffic = already exists that can grow a peering ecosystem faster than it might = otherwise, and that is also proximate to existing fiber plant, and where = diverse manholes can be placed on the edge of public right-of-way. > In the case of Wichita, that=E2=80=99s at Wichita State University. That=E2=80=99s one possible location, and again, it=E2=80=99s optimal = for Hunter=E2=80=99s specific datacenter construction model, but it=E2=80=99= s not optimal for an IXP site. > Creating a secure, neutral, resilient interconnection facility with = proper cooling, power systems, lockable cabinet space, diverse manholes = and POE isn=E2=80=99t cheap. The whole project is actually more than = the $5M grant we received. We=E2=80=99re putting in over $800k in cash, = plus additional in-kind match. No argument there, and it seems quite reasonable to build this sort of = very-small purpose-built datacenter in places that don=E2=80=99t already = have one. And I have no problem with the use of public funds to make it = happen. I do have a problem with people mis-labeling it as an IXP, = because that, as you so rightly pointed out, confuses policy-makers. = Who might mistakenly think that by funding the construction of = datacenters, they=E2=80=99d helped the IXP situation somehow. There=E2=80= =99s no problem with helping datacenters, but datacenters and IXPs are = radically different things, with different and not-aligned purposes and = utterly unrelated business models. Confusing policy-makers and leading = them to think that IXPs can be helped by throwing money at them causes a = lot of problems. Which I wind up having to straighten out, so it makes = work for me, and my time can be better spent on productive things. So, good on you for getting more small datacenters into third-tier = markets! But please stop confusing policy-makers by calling them IXPs, = or implying that they have something to do with IXPs. There=E2=80=99s a = possibility that some of them will be located in places that aren=E2=80=99= t sub-optimal for IXPs, and that would be nice, but those would be = generally be sub-optimal for datacenters, so I don=E2=80=99t recommend = that you try to do that. -Bill --Apple-Mail=_7648207F-09A4-49D3-9387-BF4906C9F0E4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEm6XJ0FdpKWJHso4lb6RwSyiLf4cFAmXX4IEACgkQb6RwSyiL f4dKOxAAk1evtkaqhgz10y2J2lBTkGlKxS3xjnx6ysSlZBJr7qhAVR327sd2Qb7O FNn8v2fkXhX+aaWXHEv8p2kd6oWnzStCPgKVoHamnelX1RWomTginz63YdwqIa4L GrirwWYatFppUjMcCjiR3loH8CVVSiwx8ES3paNfWfbxmuLyhhQ6+kT62QgMpm89 3m7uth/nuntRvv2jNE8eDcClNdxM08tmuyOSZrPte56AwzuGnkgIArae46AfOEYY XQlY1AeoOk7sOv7qBYEd0XRTM+oqNhbhzdmcKfnLzWd6RXt1hljAW/Zh+L+e4iJs PAao4Ge15O7sGm07WmoOLREPhl9PcDj228t6qdv9IrG501fHIvSn1+LpqJi4VP6O WkjlqTzjioZ+EDgcsIezUrWnoSffepDo82mXvQFEMJXtPCHJaCV3WvvF+ftpMi+6 jME/mYAmbvnJjhxDMr/7JlyqDtRU1P62m356Ac86G+iuPuNKbMfMSiUvlmEdf5MV 3PbxGBMqyoCiwxo4lL8QBRYF3QlF/rLGmFcdDyGe42V7SWkA5YWmPLtUmAtpRvh3 Eb6z934kaPE7zQDebrDOVgh+W2++IgPcQ/fpJkuxDlrMhlAKd/hss3pBtH8aBWge FTXa7ps9dDOln4hZ/fk6prhMAH3+rN3d7fuq2bqNpTLNFMk5870= =YO9e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_7648207F-09A4-49D3-9387-BF4906C9F0E4--