NANOG67 - Tipping point of community and sponsor bashing?

Job Snijders job at instituut.net
Thu Jun 16 22:55:52 UTC 2016


On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 03:52:02PM +0200, Nurani Nimpuno wrote:
> 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. 

I view this differently: an IXP that does not grow, still provides value
to the existing members/customers. The value is not growth itself, just
like the amount of connected networks is not a metric for value, but a
metric for the potential of value.

The value an IXP brings can be defined as the delta between what it
would cost to 'do it yourself' and run everything over private peering
and using a public internet exchange. And this definition of value is
underlined by the fact that a "public to private" lifecycle exists. 

> 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’t negotiate or give “sweet deals”
> to anyone. We publish our fee schedule and we stick to it.

This is an admirable quality. I believe an IXP is most successful when
it presents a level playing field. Hope you never change this :)

Kind regards,

Job



More information about the NANOG mailing list