Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet

Clayton Zekelman clayton at MNSi.Net
Wed Aug 21 17:34:29 UTC 2013


At 01:15 PM 21/08/2013, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:
>Facility neutrality especially.  If the IXP is inside a non-neutral 
>DC, it and its peers are always under constant threat of being 
>squeezed out or shutdown by any number of circumstances.  If the 
>co-lo business were separate from the facility business, it may be a 
>better environment since the IXP could convince the facility to host 
>it, which the co-lo business could then be attracted to.  All 
>depends on the circumstances and environment.


We run our colo facility as a separate business entity than our 
facilities/ISP business.  Our customers actually get two invoices if 
they buy services and colocate.  When we opened the colo, we invited 
any facilities based carrier in the region to place fibre.  My rule 
was they could have rack space for a patch panel in the MMR for free 
for cables coming in from outside.  If they needed space and power, 
then they would have to pay for that.  They could use the entrance 
conduits from the first manhole outside the building for free, but 
they'd have to get there themselves.
Colo customers pay a standard fee for fibre pairs to the MMR patch 
panel, agnostic of which carrier they are connecting to - including 
our own services.  We have some customers that don't buy services 
from us - just space and power.  Just depends on their needs.

There are 3 fibre providers in the building now.  It seems to work 
out.  Now if there was a legitimate community of interest for 
establishing an IXP here, we could do it, but alas, as has been 
pointed out, the case for TorIX is so compelling, and so much needs 
to flow through Toronto regardless, it seems the natural place to interconnect.


---

Clayton Zekelman
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
Windsor, Ontario
N8W 1H4

tel. 519-985-8410
fax. 519-985-8409        




More information about the NANOG mailing list