ugust 23, 2013 10:31 AM
To: Bill Reid; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet
...
Note: CIRA's job is not to go in and put a switch and leave. CIRA works with
the community to get the IXP up and running. We have criteria to participate,
the IXP must be a member bas
On 8/23/2013 1:30 PM, Jacques Latour wrote:
> Bill, not true.
>
> Following on our vision for Canada to have an IXP in every major city,
> specifically for Calgary, CIRA worked with CYBERA to organize a town hall
> meeting in Calgary, on September 14, 2013. At the meeting, we had interested
> m
;re doing our best with our limited resources,
>
> Jack
>
> (NOTE: English not my first language, if you're not sure what I mean, ask
> me, don't assume)
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Bill Reid [mailto:b...@mbix.ca]
> > Sent: Augus
t sure what I mean, ask me,
don't assume)
> -Original Message-
> From: Bill Reid [mailto:b...@mbix.ca]
> Sent: August-23-13 11:55 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet
>
> On 23/08/13 09:56, Mark Leonard wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug
On 23/08/13 09:56, Mark Leonard wrote:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
What CIRA is doing is providing support in the areas where previous
efforts have struggled, providing hardware, accounts payable, legal, help
with incorporation and forming sensible bylaws and stimulating
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
> What CIRA is doing is providing support in the areas where previous
> efforts have struggled, providing hardware, accounts payable, legal, help
> with incorporation and forming sensible bylaws and stimulating local
> discussion and interest. My
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:59 AM, Niels Bakker wrote:
>
>> Indeed. I think that ISPs who understand their business model well
>> enough to understand the effect the IXP will have on their
>> average-per-bit-delivery-cost is essential. I think it's also essential
>> that they have some basic famil
* wo...@pch.net (Bill Woodcock) [Wed 21 Aug 2013, 21:04 CEST]:
[..]
On Aug 21, 2013, at 10:27 AM, "William F. Maton Sotomayor"
wrote:
[..]
My anxiety lies with the future: Given everything that's already
been written, are any of these IXPs capable of becoming
self-sustaining in the future? I
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 7:06 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 8/21/13 6:56 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> >
> > but how do you represent seattle colonolizing bc?
> "keep your potatoes out of my pig."
>
Ugh. Suddenly your talk of potatoes in pigs
makes "colon-olizing" seem almost meaningful
(methinks Rand
Omnibus reply warning. Skip this one unless you're really into IXP trivia.
On Aug 21, 2013, at 7:52 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> - New participation is not too rigorously constrained (at least a
>> domestic ISP new market entrant should be able to participate)
>
> imiho, it is also nice if non-i
I would hope that at least the 3 largest cities in Canada (Toronto, Montreal,
Vancouver) should be able to sustain IXPs.
Hopefully Calgary, Edmonton and Winnipeg too considering the size of their
populations and their distance from the largest 3 cities.
On 2013-08-21, at 13:27, "William F. Ma
At 01:15 PM 21/08/2013, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:
Facility neutrality especially. If the IXP is inside a non-neutral
DC, it and its peers are always under constant threat of being
squeezed out or shutdown by any number of circumstances. If the
co-lo business were separate from the f
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
IIRC, Albuquerque has NMIX which I think was setup as for-profit. (John
Brown are you still here?) Well over a decade ago now, my recollection is
fuzzy. I don't recall the reasoning in choosing for-profit over
nont-for-profit.
[NMIX
- Original Message -
> From: "Bill Woodcock"
> On Aug 21, 2013, at 6:56 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> >> Correct. The ones in black are exchanges, the ones in gray are
> >> things
> >> that someone asserted to have been exchanges, or asserted will be
> >> exchanges.
> >
> > glad it's all so
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:10:32PM -0400, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Clayton Zekelman wrote:
>
> >Just wondering aloud if an ISP that did have commercial interest could run
> >a non-member driven exchange point successfully as long as they had
> >pricing and policie
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Randy Bush wrote:
and i would add carrier neutrality, i can haul fiber from anyone into
the exchange. this is pretty critical in the exchanges where i have
played.
Facility neutrality especially. If the IXP is inside a non-neutral DC,
it and its peers are always under c
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 12:10:32PM -0400, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Clayton Zekelman wrote:
>
> >Just wondering aloud if an ISP that did have commercial interest
> >could run a non-member driven exchange point successfully as long
> >as they had pricing and policies
On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:52 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> > New IXP founders typically contact our staff
>
> wow! i did not know we had the ixp god here! lemme go back to my
> camera-ready dreadline. :)
>
> > - Three or more participants
> > - Shared layer-2 switch fabric across which participants
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Clayton Zekelman wrote:
Just wondering aloud if an ISP that did have commercial interest could run a
non-member driven exchange point successfully as long as they had pricing and
policies that were similar to member driven exchange points.
Vey interesting that you rai
> New IXP founders typically contact our staff
wow! i did not know we had the ixp god here! lemme go back to my
camera-ready dreadline. :)
> - Three or more participants
> - Shared layer-2 switch fabric across which participants peer with
> each other, exchanging customer routes
> - New part
At 10:21 AM 21/08/2013, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote
The Peer1 setups remind me very much of what Group Telecom (defunct
Canadian backbone provider) did in the very late 90's and the very
early part of the last decade. They had them in nearly every city
they had their facilities, but the
On Aug 21, 2013, at 6:56 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> Correct. The ones in black are exchanges, the ones in gray are things
>> that someone asserted to have been exchanges, or asserted will be
>> exchanges.
>
> glad it's all so black and white, well grey. :)
When different people are asserting di
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013, Randy Bush wrote:
In Montreal, is anyone at the Peer1 exchange other than Peer1?
Peer1 exchanges are only open to Peer1 customers, I believe. At least,
that's how it worked in Toronto the last time I looked.
that is not an exchange. most isps have switches in their trans
On 8/21/13 6:56 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> but how do you represent seattle colonolizing bc?
"keep your potatoes out of my pig."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_War
>
> randy
>
> Correct. The ones in black are exchanges, the ones in gray are things
> that someone asserted to have been exchanges, or asserted will be
> exchanges.
glad it's all so black and white, well grey. :)
as i use an old fashioned mail reader, it's all
(set-foreground-color "navajo white")
to me
On Aug 21, 2013, at 3:57 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> In Montreal, is anyone at the Peer1 exchange other than Peer1?
>> Peer1 exchanges are only open to Peer1 customers, I believe. At least,
>> that's how it worked in Toronto the last time I looked.
>
> that is not an exchange. most isps have swi
do about
the poutine :-)
From: Bill Woodcock [wo...@pch.net]
Sent: August 20, 2013 11:14 PM
To: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet
On Aug 20, 2013, at 8:02 PM, Christopher Morrell
wrote:
> In Winn
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013, Jonathan Stewart wrote:
You named 2 IXPs, and only got one right. A year ago, there were two
active: TORIX in Toronto, and OTTIX in Ottawa. Ottawa is too close to
Toronto to have an impact, so OTTIX has remained small. Having only 2 open
That's not entirely accurate.
Th
>> In Montreal, is anyone at the Peer1 exchange other than Peer1?
> Peer1 exchanges are only open to Peer1 customers, I believe. At least,
> that's how it worked in Toronto the last time I looked.
that is not an exchange. most isps have switches in their transit
infrastructure.
randy
On 2013-08-21, at 6:40, Christopher Morrell
wrote:
> I think CANIX in Toronto has been dead for years. I used to operate the
> switch for it in my days at UUNET in the 90s.
Yes, very dead.
> In Montreal, is anyone at the Peer1 exchange other than Peer1?
Peer1 exchanges are only open to Peer1
I think CANIX in Toronto has been dead for years. I used to operate the switch
for it in my days at UUNET in the 90s.
In Montreal, is anyone at the Peer1 exchange other than Peer1?
On 2013-08-20, at 23:14, Bill Woodcock wrote:
>
> On Aug 20, 2013, at 8:02 PM, Christopher Morrell
> wrote:
>
On Aug 20, 2013, at 8:02 PM, Christopher Morrell
wrote:
> In Winnipeg, isn't there also the WPGIX? Do you have two competing IXPs in
> Winnipeg?
There are nominally competing efforts in Winnipeg (MBIX and WPGIX), Calgary
(YYCIX and AlbertaIX), Montreal (QIX and Peer1), Vancouver (BCIX and Pee
The old generation QIX (in Montreal) has been around a long time as an IXP
where commercial players have been present. It was managed and operated by RISQ
(a research network) but most of the members were commercial.
The new generation of QIX is managed much like TorIX and continues to be
oper
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> > As you may know CIRA has been working with groups across Canada to
> > establish new IXPs.
>
> wow! i thought there were a lot of ixps, torix, vantx, ...
>
Canada is geographically enormous. Long-haul transit is therefore costly,
and contro
At 02:36 PM 20/08/2013, Barry Shein wrote:
US Senator Ted Cruz just renounced his Canadian (dual w/ US)
citizenship.
I'm just saying.
My take on Canada? Quiet...too quiet...
So we can count him with the likes of Conrad Black? :D
--
-Barry Shein
The World | b...@the
On August 20, 2013 at 11:12 alte...@alter3d.ca (Peter Kristolaitis) wrote:
> On 08/20/2013 09:52 AM, Harald Koch wrote:
> > On 20 August 2013 09:05, Randy Bush wrote:
> >
> >> ok, i have heard privately from folk who i respect. cira seems to be on
> >> the up and up and doing good professio
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Harald Koch wrote:
> On 20 August 2013 09:05, Randy Bush wrote:
>
>>
>> ok, i have heard privately from folk who i respect. cira seems to be on
>> the up and up and doing good professional work.
>>
>
> haha. yes, because Canadians are normally so sinister and nef
On 08/20/2013 09:52 AM, Harald Koch wrote:
On 20 August 2013 09:05, Randy Bush wrote:
ok, i have heard privately from folk who i respect. cira seems to be on
the up and up and doing good professional work.
haha. yes, because Canadians are normally so sinister and nefarious...
Hey, we're nef
On 20 August 2013 09:05, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> ok, i have heard privately from folk who i respect. cira seems to be on
> the up and up and doing good professional work.
>
haha. yes, because Canadians are normally so sinister and nefarious...
> are these open, neutral, ixps, a la six etc? or big players trying to
> save the internet from itself?
>
> would some of the *local* providers in the areas who actually use the
> cira ixen care to report on the experience?
ok, i have heard privately from folk who i respect. cira seems to be on
Hi Randy,
On 2013-08-20, at 01:05, Randy Bush wrote:
>> As you may know CIRA has been working with groups across Canada to
>> establish new IXPs.
>
> wow! i thought there were a lot of ixps, torix, vantx, ...
The TorIX has been the most significant exchange point with growth and traffic
for
> As you may know CIRA has been working with groups across Canada to
> establish new IXPs.
wow! i thought there were a lot of ixps, torix, vantx, ...
are these open, neutral, ixps, a la six etc? or big players trying to
save the internet from itself?
would some of the *local* providers in the
42 matches
Mail list logo
