[NLNOG] (Weer) een nieuwe IX in Nederland

[Arnold Nipper]

On 25.04.2018 11:45, Jeroen Wunnink wrote:
> We have AMSIX, NLIX and a few other smaller fragmented exchanges already that span multiple larger+smaller datacenters and are carrier/vendor-neutral (more or less, let's not get into that ;-).
> Thus I'm a bit doubtful on the success of a 'local' datacenter IX that's vendor specific in a small country like NL.
> 
> In the US this makes more sense, given that everyone is at pretty much the same large hubs and there's not that many mature alternatives with a decent userbase.
> Competition is good, but given the maturity of some existing exchanges here and pretty much every AS being on one or multiple exchanges as-is (pun not intended), it might be a hard sell to get people on the Equinix specific ones as well. 
> 
> I'm not seeing any real added value on launching these here unless I'm missing a big incentive to do so (i.e. free IX connectivity with your Cloud Exchange port or vice versa?)
> 

From a (in this case the) DC pov: to have the same offering across all
DC worldwide. Generally, it's way cheape to operate a "local" IX only.
Hence a local IX should be able to offer lower pricing.

From a customer pov: in case you need more capacity, simply buy the
additional capacity from the "local" IX. Should save money and increases
resiliency.

Otoh this definitely will cause headache to the "distributed" IXes as
they might feel more price pressure. And I might also seem a bit unfair.
Most of the IXes invested heavily in building the interconnection
community. Launching a "local" IX now is some sort of cherry picking.
But life is not always fair.


Just my private .02€
Arnold

> 
> 
> 
>  
>  
> Jeroen Wunnink
> Integration Engineering Manager
>  
> www.gtt.net <http://www.gtt.net/>
> 
> 
>  
> On 24/04/2018, 18:55, "NLNOG on behalf of Arnold Nipper" <nlnog-bounces at nlnog.net on behalf of arnold at nipper.de> wrote:
> 
>     [ Sorry for switching to Enlish, but my Dutch is to bad ]
>     
>     On 24.04.2018 13:08, niels=nlnog at bakker.net wrote:
>     > * job at instituut.net (Job Snijders) [Tue 24 Apr 2018, 12:41 CEST]:
>     >> Er is (alweer) een nieuwe IX in Nederland, sommigen zagen deze al van
>     >> verre aankomen:
>     >>
>     >>   
>     >> https://url.emailprotection.link/?a2CpwB7v-YuNg3Hr3KRdFPHjkSLCheU7rsmqNfVTOTffXyj6sFqG9WGEfOy4T1LK_lcc4f4yUPLNeb3ZlVK5QsYWisbw8h61iSs7xc3-lwWN6lqa9KZWJNqYmrONjxPbVVZxhNfVZDL0s3m2Hr6A3dhiab_xnu-XkciOmqiCCKZo~
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> Wat is de impact op NL-IX, AMS-IX, SPEED-IX & Asteroid dat nu een
>     >> datacenter naast crossconnects, power en ruimte, ook IX diensten bied?
>     >>
>     >> Profiteren wij als operators van meer competitie in deze markt, of zal
>     >> dit leiden tot minder competitie? Hoe erg is fragmentatie?
>     > 
>     > Wat is het punt van een Internet exchange waar je alleen kan peeren met
>     > andere partijen in hetzelfde datacenter?  Dat kan je dan ook direct
>     > doen.  AMS-IX biedt operators juist vrijheid van datacenterkeuze.
>     > 
>     
>     According to Asteroid this was/is the real intention of an IX. YMMV and
>     mine also does ;-)
>     
>     Competition is always good. However where I could see an issue is when
>     DC operators also jump the bandwagon.
>     
>     From a network pov a good choice of IXes is always good as they don't
>     have to put all their eggs in one basket.
>     
>     Let's see how this all works out.
>     
>     
>     Groeten,
>     Arnold
>     -- 
>     Arnold Nipper
>     email: arnold at nipper.de
>     mobile: +49 172 2650958
>     
>     
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NLNOG mailing list
> NLNOG at nlnog.net
> http://mailman.nlnog.net/listinfo/nlnog
> 


-- 
Arnold Nipper
email: arnold at nipper.de
mobile: +49 172 2650958

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.nlnog.net/pipermail/nlnog/attachments/20180426/2b4ce4b9/attachment.sig>