Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet
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.
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
More information about the NANOG