At 11:18 p.m. 27/02/2017, Dylan Hall wrote:
Disclaimer: I worked for CityLink a while back so feel
consider the following biased or well informed as you see fit :)
I think one aspect of this discussion that is often overlooked is
who participates in the peering exchanges. It's not just a handful
of large ISP's and content providers.
Take a look at:
We have a huge range of participants: universities, schools,
government, data centres, finance, researchers, broadcasters, etc.
Very few of these organisations operate networks as their core business.
If it's so important to convince them all to opt-in to the change
what are we doing to explain why they should make that change?
Pointing at an RFC and yelling loudly hardly seems likely to be
accepted as a convincing argument outside of the networking community.
Similar Disclaimer: I worked for CityLink a while back so feel free
to consider the following biased or well informed as you see fit :)
The original name WIX was "Wellington Information Exchange" back in
1996 to 1998. In 1997 (roughly) there was trial work done with Fore
ATM switches because there was significant interest in " video"
peering and "E1-peering", between Govt agencies. Of course
VoIP-peering does a better job but has made less progress.
WIX may lack the traffic volumes and number of carriers/ISPs but WIX
is a more interesting exchange in terms of economic development in a
community. Of course it does by-pass "service providers" in doing a
lot of that.
Some of the applications that (in theory) run include page ads for
newspapers where the bank can update the interest rate in the ad for
each edition of a newspaper. The ads used to cross town via cycle
courier. WIX enabled that to be via FTP, without traffic charges. (
So many of the WIX peers were on private AS numbers and often had
someone else manage a simple peering router.
This B2B peering is why there was a focus on having as many regional
IXs as possible.