IS accuses Telkom of disruption

So - let me get this right ....

When the peering link between IS and SAIX is realllllly pumping and it gets conjested, then IS is forced to route the data via their teklom provided international lines [sattelite possibly] to get to SAIX. This costs IS a lotta bucks.

On the other post, teklom claim that IS are actually sending traffic over the peering link that is destined for international and not SAIX sites.

Now - i'm leaning towards is on this one ...
 
There are 2 sides to every story if I was saix I would have done thesame. You may ask yourself why well here is my reasoning:

If IS pumps the traffic to SAIX internationally the it will use the outbound traffic of IS to the WWW which is probably not congested in that direction since South African provider links are probably less used in a push direction than in a pull direction. When the traffic arrives at SAIX international it will then use SAIX's international links back to South Africa which would mean that saix adsl users will have 50meg less international pulling bandwidth cause IS is using it.

This topic should actually read "IS SCREWS SAIX out of 50meg international pulling capacity".
 
There may be 2 sides to the story, but it could of been delt with by telkom in a far better manner like you would expect from a large corperation.
 
MacRobert told ITWeb that after having “a serious fight with Telkom yesterday evening, Telkom has decided to reverse its policy… No reason was given… they never give a reason.”
Click to expand...
The king of the castle doesnt have to explain his actions, not even if you spend R2.5 billion per annum with him.
Just think what chance that gives the average person in the street then. So much for Papi's more customer centric approach lol.
 
One big shark just got out-sharked by the biggest shark of them all..
 
R2.5 Billion/per annum and Telkom don't give a ****?:eek:

That's quite alot of profit off from Telkom's overall profit of R3.9 Billion.
 
If IS can afford to push the traffic internationalloy surley they could afford to upgrade the peering link as Internetional costs 10 times more than local, and we are beyond trying to prove a point, as now customers are not getting service ?
 
IS thinks profits.

If they are pumping traffic via satellite to SAIX's international pipe overseas, it means that pumping data via satellite overseas is cheaper/ less hassles than using a Telkom service.
 
So IS used SAIX International traffic I (SAIX user) pay for to get their stuff back into SA instead of peering that they have to pay for...?
These big guns should play nice with the expensive toys (bandwidth) you and I bought them.
 
I think some of you have the wrong end of the stick on this issue.
1. If IS and SAIX did not peer in SA at all the traffic would go via the US anyhow
2. SAIX has no basis to stop traffic coming to them via their peers in the USA. IS has paid for the transit via those peers. Otherwise what's to stop Telkom saying...Google we want you to peer with us since you send us so much traffic and we will cut you off till you do?
3. We adsl users are paying Telkom (via WebAfrica or other ISPs in some cases) for bandwidth. So when we request a page from a web site hosted with IS, we have paid Telkom to get that data for us. Why must IS now pay Telkom as well?
4. Granted if someone on the IS network requests data from a web site hosted by SAIX, IS must pay SAIX for the traffic. This is the basis of many peering agreements, they measure traffic in both directions and offset the fees.
5. IS sends SAIX more traffic than SAIX sends IS. Thus why must IS pay?
6. Most ISPs in SA peer at JINX and do not charge one another a cent! Why is SAIX the odd one out?
 
asmith said:
6. Most ISPs in SA peer at JINX and do not charge one another a cent! Why is SAIX the odd one out?
Click to expand...

cos they are a bunch of bananas... :D ...trying to scew anything they can...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X