[lugm.org] My adventures with the Mauritius Internet Exchange Point

[Loganaden Velvindron]

 Hi Nishal,
I'm updating the blog post, based on your feedback. 
Thank you again for bring some light into this. 
My personal opinion on this is that we need better statistics. What could be done is requiring ISPs put RIPE atlas probes at each ISP's end on at least 2 customers. Then, the website for MIXP should constantly display statistics such as latency. Showing only traffic transiting like it does right now does not with diagnosing peering problems. 
So, for ISP A to ISP B, we would get the latency. For ISP B to ISP A, we would get another latency. 


     On Friday, 23 October 2015, 0:35, Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at controlfreak.co.za> wrote:
   

 On 22 Oct 2015, at 22:01, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:

> Hi All,
> I wrote about my adventures at attempting to fix the huge latency in 
> Mauritius:
> URL:
> http://logan.hackers.mu/2015/10/mixp-latency-problem


logan,

i think that you have some misconception on how the MIXP (or any IXP) is 
meant to operate.
this sentence is correct:
“The Mauritius Internet Exchange Point is where my traffic and his 
internet traffic can meet other.”

this sentence is incorrect:
“for traffic which is supposed to be managed by the Mauritius Internet 
Exchange Point”

…it’s likely that you haven’t worked for any length of time at a 
network operator, or any network that participates in internet peering, 
so let me help you understand how this all ties in together.

an internet exchange point IXP is - by almost anyone’s definition - a 
neutral meeting ground where network operators exchange traffic.  the 
IXP itself *does not* and *should not* participate in the traffic 
exchange.
that is to say, that the IXP operator (let’s call it the MIXP 
management, in this case) does nothing to the traffic, other than to 
support a platform for it to be exchanged, as quickly, and cheaply, 
across - in this case, they would be responsible for the availability of 
the ethernet switches that are in use as the foundation of the MIXP (ie. 
  is the peering switch up?)

that’s it.

the choice to *use* the IXP to move traffic between networks, is 
fundamentally, a decision of the networks that choose to peer (or not!). 
  a good IXP operator doesn’t enforce any sort of mandatory 
multilateral peering policy, and in fact, there’s zero history in the 
22years of IXPs, of this MMLP succeeding.  a good IXP operator performs 
introductions, and encourages networks to peer;  but the choice is 
really that of the network provider.  then again, the onus is on *both* 
operators to peer.  if operator A advertises his network prefixes to 
operator B, but operator B does not advertise B’s prefixes back to A, 
we only have half of the solution.  traffic would flow from B->A and 
then A->outside world->B.  (this is more common that you might imagine)

i’m correcting you, because, i think it’s important that you 
understand that it’s *not* the MIXP that’s playing tricks with your 
traffic, and *not* the MIXP that needs to take action here;  indeed, you 
did the right thing:  complain to your ISP.  and if they don’t fix it, 
complain louder, and then vote with your feet and wallet!    and do the 
same at your workplace.  and tell your friends…
in your case, there was some improvement made;  clearly you feel 
there’s more that could be done, and i’m sure with the help of 
“man traceroute” you can guide your ISP further :-)

so this sentence “I sincerely hope that the Mauritius Internet 
Exchange Point fixes the latency issue.” … is quite incorrect;  what 
you mean is:  “i sincerely hope that the two networks resolve their 
peering problems”.  you might even find that they don’t use the 
MIXP at all, but choose to peer elsewhere in-country (and that’s ok!)

perhaps, you should be asking instead:
- what can the MIXP do to promote peering, and teach networks about why 
this is important?  i think that’s a reasonable request, and one that 
the MIXP management team should be able to do.
- what tools can the MIXP use to make it easier for peering participants 
to get started peering;  also, reasonable, imho.
- how we can, as the open-source, non-tech affiliated community help?
…etc.

i hope you understand a little better, about how truly non-intrusive, an 
IXP is.

best,
—n.


  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://discuss.lugm.org/pipermail/discuss_discuss.lugm.org/attachments/20151023/73951f65/attachment.html>