Thanks Brian, for the clarification and the graph.. I suppose, since we now have some OFC, interconnectivity already to some degree, we would be able to transmit much more, when we aggregate.. Regards, Harry _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Munyao Longwe Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 10:48 PM To: [email protected] Cc: KICTAnet ICT Policy Discussions Subject: Re: [kictanet] The urgent case for a Regional Internet ExchangePoint (RIXP) Hi McTim, Attached please find a graph reporting on "local" data transfer between 7 ISPs in Tanzania and 5 ISPs in Kenya via SimbaNet's "EAIXP". This was back in February last year - when I visited the control centre in Dar es Salaam. As you will see, the graph only reports 1 week traffic - but the aggregate (IN + OUT) is about 10Gb of traffic. A key point to note is that this was via a slow satellite link running at approx 256k I can only imagine what we would see if the interlink was OFC! There is definitely a critical need for this issue to be looked at closely and in great detail. Regards, Brian On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 10:31 PM, McTim <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Harry, On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Harry Delano <[email protected]> wrote:
McTim,
Thanks, I definitely understand your point..
I'm not sure you do.
What we are saying, and I suppose what everyone should be concerned about is,if we got 10 - 30GB
Is this you as an enduser doing this much? or your corporate environment? I do about 1 GB per week. of
data per week on average,why transport to Europe and back paying transit costs in the process,
My point was those transit costs are paid already, in fact, in this era, we ("we" being the folks who have bought the fat pipes) pay for more bandwidth than we can use at the moment. I am suggesting that in the absence of hard data about regional traffic flows (and I've been looking for this data for several years), we are just speculating that regional interconnectivity is urgent (or even needed). when
we should otherwise work to develop our Regional interconnectivity. It's like saying some years earlier on, that we do not need a locl exchange point like KIXP,
It just seems like its the same argument, its not. because
it's cheaper to send traffic out and back.
but it wasn't cheaper at that point. Keep local traffic, "Local". Simple. We cannot keep talking
about regional intergration
sure we can.
when such a small matter as inter-regional connectivity cannot be sorted out.
It's not a small matter, believe me, I've tried to implement it.
While, we still have a lot of content hosted, and accessed out there it should never be lost on us that we similarly have a lot of inter-Regional traffic,
I would greatly appreciate any hard data you have on this traffic. -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel _______________________________________________ kictanet mailing list [email protected] http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet This message was sent to: [email protected] Unsubscribe or change your options at http://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/options/kictanet/blongwe%40gmail.com -- Brian Munyao Longwe e-mail: [email protected] cell: + 254 722 518 744 blog : http://zinjlog.blogspot.com meta-blog: http://mashilingi.blogspot.com