Re: Is the MIXP a white elephant? (was: Mauritius Telecom and Emtel peering at MIXP)

From: Loganaden Velvindron <loganaden_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 04:31:53 +0000

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 4:21 AM, S Moonesamy <sm+mu_at_elandsys.com> wrote:

> Hi Dr Naicken
> At 15:53 23-10-2015, Stephen Naicken wrote:
>
>> Measurements allow us to evaluate objectively, but besides that they
>> are fun to look at, so I certainly hope to see more regarding the IXP
>> in the future. The 20Mb/s figure alone is not what interests me per
>> se, but the growth of that figure. From 2-3 to 20Mb/s in approximately
>> half a year is certainly positive.
>>
>
> The traffic at the IXP in Rwanda is approximately 565 Mbps. About three
> years ago the traffic was about 99 Mbps. The MIXP was first set up in June
> 2006 (
> http://www.lexpress.mu/article/moyens-%C3%A0-l%C3%A9tude-pour-rendre-linternet-plus-accessible
> ).
>
> With respect to businesses and startups, the existence of the IXP
>> alone is probably not going to facilitate an increase in low latency,
>> localised applications and services, but I don't think we should
>> downplay its importance. I believe it to be one of many necessary
>> components, particularly for a country such as Mauritius. [1] shows
>> this to also be the case in other African nations.
>>
>
> The island would have to have an IXP or else it won't look good. I
> haven't heard any local business talking about latency. The only persons
> currently interested in latency are the gamers.
>

Speaking from a business perspective, Low latency would create a market
where it a company could set up a VOIP service in Mauritius. Other
applications include apps that specifically target Mauritians. e.g
availability of parking slots in various places in Mauritius, which is
often a pain in areas like Port Louis.



> The MIXP could certainly have been a failure, but it functions
>> correctly, so it is certainly not that. A white elephant? By
>> definition, it could only be that if the IXP is useless and has high
>> costs. Experience elsewhere shows that this should not be the case
>> [1]. In my opinion, if MIXP fails, it will be a reflection of ICT
>> policy, ISPs and others in the domain.
>>
>
> I look at MIXP as the hardware and the policy/ISP stuff. Daniel Shaw was
> commenting about the hardware part only. Data Communications Limited is
> working on the policy/ISP stuff. The Layer 2 hardware was likely not
> expensive. You would have to ask a government agency to find out the
> actual costs.
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>
>
Received on Sat Oct 24 2015 - 04:32:09 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Oct 24 2015 - 04:36:04 PST