Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard this time!
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Cc: "Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects
	heard this time!" <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>,
	"Fearghas Mckay" <fearghas@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [NNagain] The Whys of the Wichita IXP Project
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2024 22:30:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <D75932E6-85C5-42E0-838D-E9B9E2A67187@pch.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw5gRT2cF+rfdTa1hL3hjLRQgf-3xowU6wX3MDSdD2QaDA@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2769 bytes --]



> On Feb 24, 2024, at 15:03, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
> Isoc has 50k.

ISOC takes $100m/year out of the community; I guess it’s nice that they want to put $50k back.  That doesn’t help anyone build an IXP.  Money isn’t the issue.

> In my case you can safely assume I have 0 dollars in my pocket

Not a problem, that’s basically where everybody trying to get IXPs off the ground is.

> but substantial expertise, going all the way back to the 90s.

That helps, but again, siting and governance are always the big hurdles.  The technical part is like 5% at the end of the process.

> I would enjoy creating and running an IXP, but there are some needed upfront expenses to handle.

Those are the easy part.  The hard part is getting all the parties to agree on site and governance.

> Connected Nation identifies Fort Myers as an ideal location for an IXP.

That doesn’t count for much, since they’re not a potential peer.  What matters is whether there are networks ready to exchange traffic there, and willing to do the work to make that happen.

> Some traceroutes show traffic being backhauled to Naples (about 40 miles away).

Ok… are there any traceroutes that show interprovider traffic being exchanged _closer_ than forty miles away?  Forty miles roundtrip is 430 microseconds.  By itself, that’s not likely to be sufficient motivation for ISPs that serve both locations to build a new IXP, unless their circuits between the two are congested.  

Are there ISPs that serve only Fort Meyers?  Are there ISPs that serve Fort Meyers, and are dependent on transit (i.e. they don’t peer anywhere yet)?

> There is a huge infrastructure of hospital buildings, rich folk, and so on that makes much of the area seemingly ideal for fiber, but comcast has a lock on most of it (and the aging populace is still quite fond of broadcast tv). The internet in my building is not all that good, but various quotes for putting fiber in here have all stalled out. (and most residents just watch tv). MANY new buildings are under construction however....

None of that, by itself, is going to help, because none of that is related to the exchange.  All that matters for the exchange is that you have three ASes willing to exchange traffic in a location.  If you do, you can potentially get an IXP going.  If you don’t, then there’s no reason for an IXP, and building the shell of one won’t convince anyone to come exchange traffic there.

> So I figure step 1, in starting an IXP, is talk to the ISPs in the area, and also the local government and potential anchors like hospitals and schools?

Only if the hospitals and schools have ASNs.  Start with the ISPs.

                                -Bill


[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2024-02-24 21:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-21 22:54 Brent Legg
2024-02-22  8:14 ` Bill Woodcock
2024-02-22 13:39 ` Dave Taht
2024-02-22 18:58   ` rjmcmahon
2024-02-22 23:31     ` Bill Woodcock
2024-02-23  0:03       ` Dave Cohen
2024-02-23  0:04         ` Bill Woodcock
2024-02-23  0:09           ` Dave Cohen
2024-02-23  0:51             ` Bill Woodcock
2024-02-23  1:47               ` Dave Cohen
2024-02-24 12:05     ` Fearghas Mckay
2024-02-24 12:27       ` Dave Taht
2024-02-24 13:12         ` Fearghas Mckay
2024-02-24 13:24           ` Bill Woodcock
2024-02-24 14:03             ` Dave Taht
2024-02-24 21:30               ` Bill Woodcock [this message]
2024-02-24 19:30       ` Robert McMahon
2024-02-25  6:04         ` Bill Woodcock
2024-02-22 20:15   ` [NNagain] Email and The Internet? Jack Haverty
2024-02-23  0:02   ` [NNagain] The Whys of the Wichita IXP Project Bill Woodcock

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/nnagain.lists.bufferbloat.net/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=D75932E6-85C5-42E0-838D-E9B9E2A67187@pch.net \
    --to=woody@pch.net \
    --cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
    --cc=fearghas@gmail.com \
    --cc=nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox