On 11/7/24 19:22, Will Hargrave wrote:
Hi Tom,
I don’t really think your last statement is true.
UK, and London in particular, is quite a dynamic market. At LONAP we see plenty
of networks connect and see an immediate “quick win” of traffic by connection
to our route-servers, where adoption among the membership is something like
85-90%.
If an operator decides to replace those RS sessions with a (often intractable)
portal to request bilateral sessions - or worse, email - that immediate traffic
benefit is lost. That can affect the value the IXP provides to its members.
Correct.
The paradigm shift happening in the content/cloud space is that the
"quick win value" eyeball networks enjoy from peering with the route
server to reach them does not appear to continue to be worth the admin.
effort for said content/cloud folk.
Not sure how or if adding a portal layer makes that easier for them to
manage.
But of course, there is the real issue that continuously upgrading
clusters that serve exchange points across most of the exchange points
around the world is a task that might have been underestimated, after all.
Mark.
