[190155] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NANOG67 - Tipping point of community and sponsor bashing?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nurani Nimpuno)
Thu Jun 16 18:23:32 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Nurani Nimpuno <nurani@netnod.se>
In-Reply-To: <CAFJiuFpzO91_coAp=2VUQKaiKehXCPZAJsvWeG_5yTE0j-UuWw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 15:52:02 +0200
To: Dave Temkin <dave@temk.in>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Hi Dave,
So, I watched your presentation this week at NANOG remotely, sorry I =
couldn=E2=80=99t be there.
Ok, so while you make a lot of very different points in your =
presentations, I *think* the basic argument you are making is that IXPs =
are too expensive. Correct me if I=E2=80=99m wrong. Or more =
specifically, you are saying that Ams-IX, Linx, Netnod and DE-CIX are =
too expensive. You have not looked at US IXPs because they don=E2=80=99t =
publish their fees, and you have not looked at the whole IXP community.=20=
I think you are then also questioning if these IXPs are using their =
funds wisely. You are also stating that you are talking about these IXPs =
from the perspective of a big US provider connecting into Europe (i.e =
not a small local ISP). You question some of the IXP expansions into the =
US. You question the membership model as a viable model for IXPs. You =
also say that those who sustain the IXPs growth should benefit from =
them. And you question why there are so many IXPs, and not only a =
handful of very big ones. I hope I have captured this correctly.=20
Ok, so firstly, I must say I=E2=80=99m a little disappointed that you or =
your staff have never approach us to discuss any of this. We have Netnod =
meetings twice a year, we have been present at many of the same events =
in the last year and we have always strived to be open, transparent and =
to listen to our entire customer base. I take your point about the =
Netnod fees (even though I would also like to point out that we have =
actually reduced our other port fees for 100mbps, 1G, remote peering). =
But I=E2=80=99m not sure why you haven=E2=80=99t brought it to us =
directly. Netflix has been at several Netnod meetings in the past, so we =
have had plenty of opportunity to discuss this.=20
But ok, let=E2=80=99s leave that aside. I will try to address some of =
your points.
Firstly as many have pointed out, these four IXPs are not representative =
of all IXPs, and the four of us are also very different from each other.=20=
I can=E2=80=99t address the IXP expansion into the US. And I don=E2=80=99t=
represent a membership-based IXP.=20
The European IXP community is a very diverse one, serving different =
regions, markets and different types of customers. I personally believe =
that this rich diversity is one of the reasons the European =
interconnection scene has been flourishing as well as it has. There is a =
big difference between Europe and the rest of the world, particularly =
the US. And the European IXP community was held up as a model for the =
rest of the world by many. We have been cooperating for many years =
through the Euro-IX where our common goals have been to improve =
interconnection in the region, share information and experience and work =
to improve services for our customers. (I believe you have been trying =
to do the same through Open-IX.)
The diversity has also been seen as important to serve both the very =
large international providers like yourself, and the small local ISPs. =
Localising traffic and building a local operator community have been =
seen as an important ingredient in the value of the IXPs. Our challenge =
as IXPs is to find the best way to serve all these different needs and =
wishes from our very diverse customer base. Having only a handful of =
very large IXPs would in my view not serve these different needs as =
well. Personally I am a subscriber to both Netflix and HBO. I like =
diversity. :) But sure, it=E2=80=99s an interesting discussion to be =
had!
As others have pointed out, contrary to common belief, the technical =
part of an IXP is one of the simplest. There is a plethora of examples =
of IXPs in Africa, but also in the US, where IXPs simply are a single =
switch sitting in a closet somewhere, only serving a handful of ASes. =
One of the biggest challenges for an IXP is to gain customers and get =
enough gravitation and value to the exchange. A growing exchange point =
is not only a "nice-to-have" for those operating it, but vital to those =
networks who peer there. If you stop adding value to those networks =
peering at the IX, you will slowly become irrelevant.=20
While some think that a good technical solution would sell itself, I =
believe that is a fallacy (not only in the IXP world). Netnod started =
out as a very small IXPs with only a few local operators connected to =
it. And I strongly believe that if we hadn=E2=80=99t done as much =
outreach as we do, we would=E2=80=99ve stayed tiny until this day.=20
As for how we do this outreach and what events we go to, while I can=E2=80=
=99t speak for any other IXes, I seriously doubt that any professional =
IXP today would not carefully assess the business value for each event =
it attends. At Netnod, we evaluate each event we send people to, and =
assess and measure the value afterwards.=20
Then I thought I would write some words about Netnod specifically since =
you bring us up.=20
(As others have pointed out, the RIPE meeting social is covered partly =
by the RIPE NCC, partly by the sponsor, and partly by the participants =
themselves, so I=E2=80=99ll just leave that there.)=20
Firstly, yes we are a little strange. We are not just an IXP. We run =
i-root.servers.net and we provide DNS anycast service, among other =
things. We also have a funny governance structure for historical reasons =
(which was set up when Netnod was established and the IXP and I-root =
=E2=80=9Cmoved=E2=80=9D there) many years ago. We are owned by a =
foundation and we describe ourselves as non-profit. In Sweden there is =
actually no =E2=80=9Cnon-profit=E2=80=9D status as such, but we have =
always operated under that principle. We are not a membership =
organisation, but we have always strived to be transparent, and whenever =
we have wanted to make major changes to our services, we have consulted =
the customer base. That is how we have worked on both the IX and DNS =
side.=20
We work in a similar way with our pricing. (You mention that there is a =
lot of negotiations on pricing with IXPs.) I would like to be 100% clear =
that for the Netnod IX, we don=E2=80=99t negotiate or give =E2=80=9Csweet =
deals=E2=80=9D to anyone. We publish our fee schedule and we stick to =
it. Whenever someone wants a special deal (which happens often, =
particularly with the larger customers), our response is that we treat =
everyone equally. If you want a cheaper deal, then another customer is =
basically funding your reduction. So we don=E2=80=99t do this. We =
believe this is more fair and transparent.=20
Coming back to Netnod's broader scope, this also means that we do other =
things than sell peering. We go to, and sponsor events that might not =
make sense from a peering perspective. We support other =E2=80=9CGood of =
the Internet=E2=80=9D initiatives, we participate in standards =
development (particularly on the DNS side), we participate in TLD =
associations etc. Some of these activities may seem odd to some who are =
only involved with one part of our business, I understand that. We try =
to be open with this though.=20
As for a general discussion about costs, service levels and IXPs, I =
think there is a very interesting discussion that could be had with a =
more focused discussion. How do =E2=80=9Cwe=E2=80=9D best serve today's =
very diverse set of operators? How does an IXP strike that balance? How =
do operators best solve their interconnection needs (through IXPs, =
private peering, transit etc) and is that changing? What type of =
interconnection environment do we believe best scales Internet growth in =
the future? What is the total cost of interconnection, where are the big =
costs, what are the different models and where is the whole industry =
moving? Now THOSE are discussions I personally would find very valuable!=20=
Cheers,
Nurani
Netnod=20
> On 15 juni 2016, at 13:21, Dave Temkin <dave@temk.in> wrote:
>=20
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 3:43 AM, Aled Morris <aledm@qix.co.uk> wrote:
>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Me too and I was confused about what the point of it was.
>>=20
>> I had always assumed the customers of those IXs he singled out were
>> generally happy with the service they were getting and the money they =
are
>> paying.
>>=20
>> Is Dave trying to say they are being duped? Is he trying to identify =
a
>> need for regulation?
>>=20
>=20
> I was pointing out facts about IXPs that many did not know, including =
the
> actual organizational structure.
>=20
> I was also opining on how these IXPs could be better; mainly, how they
> choose to spend money.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>>=20
>> Perhaps Dave was advocating the SIX model and suggesting the =
customers of
>> the existing exchanges should be looking to organise an alternative =
in
>> their localities.
>>=20
>=20
> Absolutely correct (which should answer Hank's question, as well).
>=20
>=20
>>=20
>> Or perhaps this is a wakeup call for LoNAP and the smaller exchanges =
who
>> "compete" with AMS-IX, DE-CIX and NetNod - stop trying to mimic their
>> commercial models (big fees which pay for staff and marketing) and =
look
>> instead at the lean SIX as the way of offering a service at a price
>> competitive to transit.
>>=20
>=20
> Also absolutely correct. I don't want to see them falling into a trap =
of
> conflating marketing and outreach and/or offering an overly rich =
product
> set at the cost of price and operational simplicity.
>=20
>=20
>> Or was there a hidden message in Dave's presentation that I missed?
>>=20
>=20
> Seems like you got it.
>=20
>=20
>> Aled
>>=20
>=20
