[menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering

Fahad AlShirawi fahad at 2connectbahrain.com
Thu Aug 2 22:24:02 GMT 2007

God I am way behind in my emails....

Amjad, we had Flag discuss the IP pops with us during the last MENOG.
However, this is operator specific: Flag. Not carrier neutral. This won't
help with IX propagation or peering. It's more of a transit business. If
they aggregate regional traffic, it's so they'll have a better transit case
not because they'll allow us to swap traffic.


-----Original Message-----
From: menog-bounces at menog.net [mailto:menog-bounces at menog.net] On Behalf Of
Khan, Amjad
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:46 AM
To: 'Bill Woodcock'; Salman Al-Mannai
Cc: menog at menog.net; Kais Al-Essa
Subject: RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering

FLAG has a footprint in the GCC via its FALCON Landing Stations in Saudi
(Jeddah), Saudi (Khobar), Kuwait, Qatar, Dubai, Oman. FLAG is in the process
of signing agreements with the local partners to build an IP layer
interconnecting these FALCON landing stations by deploying IP POPs.

We are also trying to sign an agreement to build an Aggregation POP in a
select landing station that will aggregate the GCC IP traffic. This will
serve as a High Speed (STM-4/STM-16) virtual-IX and provide a POP-POP RTD of
less than 25 msec within the GCC. 
Therefore ISPs, content providers can connect to the FALCON POPs and not
only take IP transit, VPN, services but, also become part of this
virtual-IX. As the traffic grows the virtual-IX can evolve as an independent

Amjad Khan
Manager, IP services - MEA

-----Original Message-----
From: menog-bounces at menog.net [mailto:menog-bounces at menog.net] On Behalf Of
Bill Woodcock
Sent: 02 August 2007 05:32
To: Salman Al-Mannai
Cc: menog at menog.net; Kais Al-Essa
Subject: RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering

      On Tue, 31 Jul 2007, Salman Al-Mannai wrote:
    > The initial proposal, as put together by Saleem
    > suggested two options: Centralized Model and
    > Distributed or Bilateral.  On the centralized model, 
    > the obvious locations for an IX are:  Dubai-UAE and 
    > Jeddah-KSA primarily due to the global FO availability.

Hello, Salman.

With regard to the above, I think that if we were having this conversation 
fifteen years ago, it would still have been reasonable to discuss the need 
for a single IXP for the region.  But the time for that is pretty clearly 
past...  If you look at this map of IXP distribution:


You'll note that the Middle East is the only developed region of the world 
other than Mexico that doesn't already have a fairly dense distribution of 
IXPs to support communications growth, at this point.  Rather than 
thinking about one location, I think you'd need to be looking at thirty 
or forty, to reach parity.  And if you think about what thirty or forty 
cities in the Middle East means, you don't have to do any winnowing: it 
includes every capitol and every major city in the region.  Just as every 
capitol and every major city in Europe and East Asia have them.

So if the question is "Jeddah or Dubai" the answer is "yes, and Manama and 
Doha and Muscat and Riyadh..."


This e-mail message is confidential and is intended only for the use of the
individual or entity named above and contains information which is or may be
confidential, non-public or legally privileged. Any dissemination or
distribution of this message other than to its intended recipient is
strictly prohibited. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor
the contents to any other person. If you have received this message in
error, please
notify us by email to postmaster at flagtelecom.com immediately and delete the
original message and all copies from all locations in your computer systems.

This e-mail has been swept by Mailsweeper TM for viruses. However, FLAG
Telecom cannot accept liability for any damage which you may sustain as a
result of software viruses.


This message has been scanned for viruses by MailControl -

More information about the Menog mailing list