On Dec 3, 2009, at 1:00 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote: > On Dec 2, 2009, at 4:48 PM, Jonas Frey wrote: > >> the DE-CIX pricing is now 500 Euro/month...since 1st october...see end >> of that page. >> Both DE-CIX and AMS-IX have decreased their pricing this year..almost at >> the same time. I guess this is a move to stop company leaving public >> exchanges...i have seen this trend, too. > > That is not why LINX lowers its prices. (I cannot say why AMS-IX lowers its > prices.) > > LINX is a member-based organization. The member _own_ the exchange. They > are paying themselves, and they only pay themselves as much as it costs to > run the exchange. With more members, more scale, and advances in equipment, > unit (i.e. port) costs go down. > > In a cost-recovery model, that means prices drop.
For exactly the same reason AMS-IX lowered its prices. - Henk > > LINX dropped prices mid-year 2009, and are dropping prices again in January > 2009. AMS-IX dropped prices once in that time. DE-CIX actually raised its > prices for many members, so they could lower their prices for others. > Interesting strategy.... > > -- > TTFN, > patrick > > >> On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 22:20, Leo Bicknell wrote: >>> In a message written on Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 12:46:46PM -0800, Lasher, Donn >>> wrote: >>>> I realized that paid transit is down at almost obscene levels, but is >>>> that enough of a reason to increase hop-count, latencies, etc? >>>> >>>> Why disconnect from public mostly-free peering? >>> >>> Let's look at some economics. I'm going to pick on some folks here, >>> solely because they have prices online and because they are, I feel, >>> representative prices. >>> >>> http://www.cogentco.com/us/ >>> >>> "Home of the $4 Megabit!" So we have transit prices at $4 per megabit. >>> >>> http://www.de-cix.net/content/services/public-peering.html >>> >>> A 1GE link to the exchange is 1000 euro per month, which is $1505 USD at >>> the moment, let's call it $1500 for round numbers. >>> >>> Now, your 1GE exchange port really shouldn't be run past 60% or so, if >>> you want to provide good service. So it's really $1500 for 600Mbits, >>> or $2.50 per Megabit. >>> >>> If you're an ISP you look at this and go, humm, I take in $4 from my >>> customer, and hand $2.50 of it right back out to an exchange operator >>> if I use public peering, making the exchange 62% of my costs right up >>> front. On the other hand, if I choose wisely where I private peer I >>> can do it at places with a one-time fee for the cable, so there is >>> $0 in MRC. I have to buy a router port, sure, but it's also $0 MRC, >>> just a capital asset that can get written off over many years. >>> >>> This is the math with the $4 megabit advertised price. The halls at >>> Nanog are awash in $2 a megabit rumors if you have large enough commits >>> (say, a few 10GE's). Taking in $2 and paying the exchange operator >>> $2.50 of it....well, that's not so good. :) >>> >>> Transit prices have fallen enough that MRC's for switch ports, and >>> even MRC's for fiber runs (are any of you still in a colo that wants >>> $500 a month for a fiber run, I didn't think so) are eating up huge >>> chunks of the inbound revenue, and thus just don't make sense. >>> >>> Now, before someone points it out, yes, DECIX's rate per megabit is >>> lower on a 10GE and a second port, so if you can move 2 ports of 10GE of >>> traffic you can make it a lot cheaper. Also, Cogents $4 a megabit is >>> probably predicated on you being in the right location and having the >>> right commit, if you need a DS-3 in West Nowhere you'll pay a higher >>> rate, and that helps offset some of the costs. I've oversimplified, and >>> it's a very complex problem for most providers; however I know many are >>> looking at the fees for peering ports go from being in the noise to a >>> huge part of their cost structure and that doesn't work. >> >> >> > >
