Time for an open Internet exchange?
Local bandwidth costs and the lack of local content are things often mentioned when discussing high bandwidth costs. More local content will mean less reliance on costly international bandwidth and potentially lower broadband costs.
One potential solution to reducing the cost of local bandwidth and making it possible for network operators and internet service providers (ISPs) to easily exchange traffic and access content on each other’s networks, is an "open internet exchange".
The concept of an open Internet exchange, where different network operators and ISPs can freely peer with each other without the need for costly agreements, is nothing new and happens in many countries across the world.
Such an exchange or central peering point basically allow service providers to provide as much connectivity as possible to this point, which is essentially a powerful switch, and peer with other providers at this exchange without any restrictions or the need to sign agreements with other peering parties.
This facility does not currently exist in South Africa, which means that service providers must typically negotiate peering agreements with whoever they want to peer with. These agreements can be time consuming and costly and larger ISPs and operators are not known for making it easy for smaller ISPs to peer with them.
The Johannesburg Internet Exchange (JINX) does provide a central peering point to its members, but this does not guarantee peering with larger players despite the costs involved.
ISPA GM Ant Brooks explains: “ISPA’s goal with JINX is simply to facilitate more efficient interconnection between its members, which JINX has now done successfully for twelve years.”
Brooks explains that individual peering agreements is something completely outside of ISPA’s control. “We can’t force our members to peer with other parties if they don’t want to. Or rather, we could, but then they just wouldn’t connect to the INXes at all, which would help no-one.”
Brooks however highlights that most JINX members don’t have serious barriers for peering agreements. “In my experience, those ISPs [struggling with individual peering agreements] are the exception, rather than the rule,” said Brooks.
JINX Costs
Some industry commentators and ISPs have however fingered the high costs associated with peering at JINX as a potential barrier to entry for smaller players. These costs include equivalent line charges, monthly JINX peering charges and ISPA membership costs.
To join ISPA costs between R350 a month and R6 100 a month depending on the size of the ISP. JINX joining fees range between R2 500 a month and R25 000 a month, again depending on the size of the ISP.
And then there are equivalent line charges. An equivalent line charge is levied on any JINX participant connecting to JINX using non-publicly tariffed infrastructure and ranges from R22 000 per month for a 2Mbps to 8Mbps connection to R375 000 per month for a 300Mbps to 500Mbps connection.
An issue often raised by small- and medium- sized ISPs is the speed restriction on such members at JINX. Small members may only peer at a speed of up to 128Kbps while medium-sized ISPs are restricted to a maximum speed of 512Kbps. With current broadband speeds in excess of 4Mbps these peering speed restrictions have been described as archaic by one ISPA member.
The current pricing model is however under discussion, with a likely outcome being the scrapping of equivalent line charges and the introduction of monthly JINX charges. Brooks did not want to make any predictions as to what a new pricing model would look like, simply saying that "all of the issues are part of the current internal discussions".
Brooks however feels that JINX provides a cost effective peering point for ISPs, pointing out that it will cost significantly more to set up individual peering to all networks an ISP want to peer with.
The current peak traffic at JINX is around 300Mbps, with MTN Network Solutions and Internet Solutions making up the bulk of the traffic.
Is open better?
Some ISPs feel that the restrictions and costs associated with JINX, and potentially soon the Cape Town Internet Exchange (CINX), are not conducive to a free and cost effective peering environment.
This has raised calls for an open peering platform where operators, ISPs and even free community networks like JAWUG can peer at a low monthly cost and gain access to each other’s networks.
It is, however, debatable whether larger players such as Internet Solutions, Telkom/SAIX, Neotel, Verizon Business, Vox Telecom and MTN Network Solutions will throw their weight behind such an initiative and provide links to such an exchange.
Unless the larger players support such an exchange its value will be very limited. With many individual peering agreements and the JINX already in existence – and with CINX on its way – it is unlikely that these larger ISPs will find the concept too palatable.
Loading ...