<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
</head>
<body>
Haha! I'll add my 2 cents.. The MIXP is run by idiots.. I'm not sure if im allowed to disclose the capacity at which each of the participating members is connected at...<br>
<br>
2 years ago, I took the initiative to start an IXP taking into consideration the fact that every active ISP is present in the cyber tower 1. Resources etc etc were requested, but I was blocked by one asshole known as Viv, licencing was the issue and the ICTA
was even involved.. License has been finally obtained, but unfortunately some people spread words that I'm not of good character...<br>
<br>
Ou aider, ou tasser!<br>
<br>
Sent from my Huawei Mobile<br>
<br>
-------- Original Message --------<br>
Subject: Re: [lugm.org] My adventures with the Mauritius Internet Exchange Point<br>
From: Ashvin Oogorah <br>
To: Loganaden Velvindron ,LUGM Discuss Mailing List <br>
CC: <br>
<br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Hi All,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Just wanted to add my 2cents.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
There doesn't seem to be any obligation for ISPs to peer at IXPs.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
However, there is clearly benefits for peering at IXPs. For instance, peering directly with the big content providers at LINX is much cheaper than buying transit.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Why is LINX so appealing to ISPs. I guess coz there is quite a number of Content providers and ISPs present there + it is quite easy to peer multilaterally - LINX provides Route Servers to facilitate Multilateral peerings for providers that are willing to participate.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
That would probably help answer why there is less motivation for any peerings at MIXP. </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
What is the rate of traffic between ISPs in Mauritius? From my past experience, between MT and Emtel that was quite low ~10Mbps. That was happening through a private Interconnect peering, nothing to do with MIXP.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
I will now get to another potential problem as I see it.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
It is the provider's responsibility to have the transport circuit upto the MIXP which is in Ebene.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Let's say MT provides a circuit of 10Mbps. We have all providers [Emtel, Bharat Telecom, DCL, MTML etc] drawing traffic from MT or vice-versa. Generally, we would see more inbound traffic into MIXP from MT as they have more content on their network than other
providers - email, web etc. Ever wondered why Bharat Telecom, DCL representatives are so adamant about drawing traffic from MIXP??</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
What happens if the traffic demand is increasing beyond 10Mbps outbound from MT to the IXP. Demand being greater than capacity, the circuit cannot sustain this demand, drops start to appear and quality of experience gets worse including latency increasing as
well. Most likely, customers downloading content would start complaining to their ISPs. E.g Emtel subscribers would start complaining about their connectivity and obviously use an MT connection to compare with the latter being flawless.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Q: Who has the leverage on MT to increase its capacity to MIXP??? Do you think MT would care?</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
I guess Network Engineers from other ISPs would have a routing solution to that - Prefer MT prefixes from their transit [latency increases, but no drops], keeping their customers happy. </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
IMHO, the main issue in Mauritius is the level of competition in the Telecommunications/Service Provider sector. Regulatory framework is not helping either. In Mauritius, if you want fast broadband there are few options but not all of them are using the same
access technology - there is no level playing field.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Simply compare Reunion island to Mauritius. They have LLU which opens the incumbent's network and increases competition, eventually customers have wider choice of ISPs for more or less same service. I am a big supporter of LLU and would want to see that in
Mauritius. I even queried the previous Minister of ICT on this matter but that was left unanswered.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
I agree with Nishal's comments about how to promote an MIXP. There needs to be proper organisation and real drive within the MIXP and its members. I can remember the MIXP meeting happening only once in 2-3 years, discussed about some action points, then no
follow-up.<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0); font-family:HelveticaNeue,'Helvetica Neue',Helvetica,Arial,'Lucida Grande',sans-serif; font-size:16px">- how we can, as the open-source, non-tech affiliated community help?</span><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Count me in to contribute.<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Have a great weekend.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Cheers,</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier new',monospace; font-size:small">
Ashvin</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all">
<div>
<div class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">Ashvin</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 7:22 AM, Loganaden Velvindron <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:gnukid1@yahoo.co.uk" target="_blank">gnukid1@yahoo.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif; font-size:14px">
<div><span></span></div>
<div>Hi Nishal,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm updating the blog post, based on your feedback. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thank you again for bring some light into this. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">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. </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">So, for ISP A to ISP B, we would get the latency. For ISP B to ISP A, we would get another latency. </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div style="display:block">
<div style="font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif; font-size:14px">
<div style="font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,Sans-Serif; font-size:16px">
<div dir="ltr"><font size="2" face="Arial">On Friday, 23 October 2015, 0:35, Nishal Goburdhan <<a href="mailto:nishal@controlfreak.co.za" target="_blank">nishal@controlfreak.co.za</a>> wrote:<br>
</font></div>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 22 Oct 2015, at 22:01, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
> Hi All,<span class=""><br clear="none">
> I wrote about my adventures at attempting to fix the huge latency in <br clear="none">
> Mauritius:<br clear="none">
</span>> URL:<br clear="none">
> <a shape="rect" href="http://logan.hackers.mu/2015/10/mixp-latency-problem" target="_blank">
http://logan.hackers.mu/2015/10/mixp-latency-problem</a><br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
logan,<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
i think that you have some misconception on how the MIXP (or any IXP) is <br clear="none">
meant to operate.<br clear="none">
this sentence is correct:<br clear="none">
“The Mauritius Internet Exchange Point is where my traffic and his <br clear="none">
internet traffic can meet other.”<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
this sentence is incorrect:<br clear="none">
“for traffic which is supposed to be managed by the Mauritius Internet <br clear="none">
Exchange Point”<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
…it’s likely that you haven’t worked for any length of time at a <br clear="none">
network operator, or any network that participates in internet peering, <br clear="none">
so let me help you understand how this all ties in together.<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
an internet exchange point IXP is - by almost anyone’s definition - a <br clear="none">
neutral meeting ground where network operators exchange traffic. the <br clear="none">
IXP itself *does not* and *should not* participate in the traffic <br clear="none">
exchange.<br clear="none">
that is to say, that the IXP operator (let’s call it the MIXP <br clear="none">
management, in this case) does nothing to the traffic, other than to <br clear="none">
support a platform for it to be exchanged, as quickly, and cheaply, <br clear="none">
across - in this case, they would be responsible for the availability of <br clear="none">
the ethernet switches that are in use as the foundation of the MIXP (ie. <br clear="none">
is the peering switch up?)<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
that’s it.<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
the choice to *use* the IXP to move traffic between networks, is <br clear="none">
fundamentally, a decision of the networks that choose to peer (or not!). <br clear="none">
a good IXP operator doesn’t enforce any sort of mandatory <br clear="none">
multilateral peering policy, and in fact, there’s zero history in the <br clear="none">
22years of IXPs, of this MMLP succeeding. a good IXP operator performs <br clear="none">
introductions, and encourages networks to peer; but the choice is <br clear="none">
really that of the network provider. then again, the onus is on *both* <br clear="none">
operators to peer. if operator A advertises his network prefixes to <br clear="none">
operator B, but operator B does not advertise B’s prefixes back to A, <br clear="none">
we only have half of the solution. traffic would flow from B->A and <br clear="none">
then A->outside world->B. (this is more common that you might imagine)<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
i’m correcting you, because, i think it’s important that you <br clear="none">
understand that it’s *not* the MIXP that’s playing tricks with your <br clear="none">
traffic, and *not* the MIXP that needs to take action here; indeed, you <br clear="none">
did the right thing: complain to your ISP. and if they don’t fix it, <br clear="none">
complain louder, and then vote with your feet and wallet! and do the <br clear="none">
same at your workplace. and tell your friends…<br clear="none">
in your case, there was some improvement made; clearly you feel <br clear="none">
there’s more that could be done, and i’m sure with the help of <br clear="none">
“man traceroute” you can guide your ISP further :-)<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
so this sentence “I sincerely hope that the Mauritius Internet <br clear="none">
Exchange Point fixes the latency issue.” … is quite incorrect; what <br clear="none">
you mean is: “i sincerely hope that the two networks resolve their <br clear="none">
peering problems”. you might even find that they don’t use the <br clear="none">
MIXP at all, but choose to peer elsewhere in-country (and that’s ok!)<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
perhaps, you should be asking instead:<br clear="none">
- what can the MIXP do to promote peering, and teach networks about why <br clear="none">
this is important? i think that’s a reasonable request, and one that <br clear="none">
the MIXP management team should be able to do.<br clear="none">
- what tools can the MIXP use to make it easier for peering participants <br clear="none">
to get started peering; also, reasonable, imho.<br clear="none">
- how we can, as the open-source, non-tech affiliated community help?<br clear="none">
…etc.<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
i hope you understand a little better, about how truly non-intrusive, an <br clear="none">
IXP is.<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
best,
<div><br clear="none">
—n.<br clear="none">
</div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
__________________________________________________________<br>
Linux User Group of Mauritius (LUGM) Discuss mailing list<br>
Website: <a href="http://lugm.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lugm.org</a><br>
Mailing list archive: <a href="http://discuss.lugm.org/pipermail/discuss_discuss.lugm.org/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
http://discuss.lugm.org/pipermail/discuss_discuss.lugm.org/</a><br>
Forum: <a href="http://lugm.org/forum/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lugm.org/forum/</a><br>
IRC: #<a href="http://linux.mu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">linux.mu</a> on Freenode<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>