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

[Bill Woodcock]

      On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Baher Esmat wrote:
    > I must also say that I was a little bit puzzled with parts of the discussion
    > as it appeared to me that we're not differentiating between the Incumbents
    > like STC, Batelco, ect., (those incumbents are also ISPs) and other smaller
    > ISPs. My understanding is that the Incumbents whether they have bilateral
    > peeing among themselves or peer via IXPs, they remain the big guys who own
    > the customers as well as most of the traffic. The small ISPs on the other
    > hand have to have their own IXP setups and hence be in better positions to
    > negotiate better deals with Incumbents, or with upstream providers if ISPs
    > are allowed to connect directly to them.

Another way of putting it is to say that everyone needs to peer, in order 
to grow.  The big guys know this (they couldn't have gotten big if they 
didn't), and will always peer, whether internationally (in London or 
Amsterdam or Hong Kong or elsewhere), or across private bilateral sessions 
between each other.

It's the little guys who need the IXPs, in order to be able to efficiently 
compete with that, and peer as well.  If the big guys grow, and the little 
guys don't, you've got an increase in the digital divide problem.  If 
everyone grows, the whole market grows, and more new service is available 
to all potential customers at lower, more competitive prices.

                                -Bill