Vancouver IXP - VanTX - BCNet

Niels Bakker niels=nanog at
Fri Aug 23 10:59:12 UTC 2013

* woody at (Bill Woodcock) [Wed 21 Aug 2013, 21:04 CEST]:
>On Aug 21, 2013, at 10:27 AM, "William F. Maton Sotomayor" 
><wmaton at> wrote:
>>My anxiety lies with the future: Given everything that's already 
>>been written, are any of these IXPs capable of becoming 
>>self-sustaining in the future?  It's a rhetorical question 
>>applicable to any starting IXP.
>Indeed.  I think that ISPs who understand their business model well 
>enough to understand the effect the IXP will have on their 
>average-per-bit-delivery-cost is essential.  I think it's also 
>essential that they have some basic familiarity with the different 
>ways IXPs can fail, or fail to thrive, so that they can avoid 
>mistakes others have made in the past.  Over-spending, particularly 
>on switches, is a huge killer of IXPs.  Under-provisioning of 
>circuits to the IXP is another big mistake.  Failure to encourage 
>local content and hosting is another.

Can you cite a few examples of an IXP going under because of 
overspending on switch hardware?  You call this a "huge killer" 
so there must be dozens you can choose from.

	-- Niels.

"It's amazing what people will do to get their name on the internet, 
  which is odd, because all you really need is a Blogspot account."
			-- roy edroso,

More information about the NANOG mailing list