[kictanet] The urgent case for a Regional Internet Exchange Point (RIXP)

McTim dogwallah at gmail.com
Mon Jun 7 22:31:29 EAT 2010

Hi Harry,

On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Harry Delano <harry at comtelsys.co.ke> wrote:
> McTim,
> Thanks, I definitely understand your point..

I'm not sure you do.

> What we are saying, and I suppose what everyone should be concerned about
> is,if we got 10 - 30GB

Is this you as an enduser doing this much? or your corporate
environment?  I do about 1 GB per week.

> data per week on average,why transport to Europe and back paying transit
> costs in the process,

My point was those transit costs are paid already, in fact, in this
era, we ("we" being the folks who have bought the fat pipes) pay for
more bandwidth than we can use at the moment.  I am suggesting that in
the absence of hard data about regional traffic flows (and I've been
looking for this data for several years), we are just speculating that
regional interconnectivity is urgent (or even needed).

> we should otherwise work to develop our Regional interconnectivity. It's
> like saying some years
> earlier on, that we do not need a locl exchange point like KIXP,

It just seems like its the same argument, its not.

> it's cheaper to send traffic
> out and back.

but it wasn't cheaper at that point.

Keep local traffic, "Local". Simple. We cannot keep talking
> about regional intergration

sure we can.

> when such a small matter as inter-regional connectivity cannot be sorted
> out.

It's not a small matter, believe me, I've tried to implement it.

> While, we still have a lot of content hosted, and accessed out there it
> should never be lost on us
> that we similarly have a lot of inter-Regional traffic,

I would greatly appreciate any hard data you have on this traffic.


"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

More information about the KICTANet mailing list