<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<title>RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering</title>
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Osama,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>I’ll check. That was a very good presentation you gave on
Saudi. By the way, how has Bayanat’s network changed since last MENOG? If
it’s not confidential, share? We’d all like to see what’s
happening. Also, STC doesn’t really peer anywhere. They simply allow a
Tier 1 into the country for a revenue share. IP Transit is with Teleglobe, MPLS
currently with AT&T, Orange, FT, and Equant (Yes I know, the last three
belong to the same group).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>It’s actually not as bad a business model as it sounds.
First of all, they own the network. Saudi is huge. Maintaining a network the
size of STC’s takes a lot. Secondly, they insure new services are
available immediately under their umbrella. It gives them time to develop their
own in the future without being at a huge competitive disadvantage. Finally,
sunset clause helps a little.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>By the way, just a thought, has anyone run a reliability and
performance test between GCC countries? I’d love to test from our network
to that of ISPs in the region. I think it will give us a better picture than ‘pictures’
on how our traffic is all being routed. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Also, what performance degradation do various levels of content filtering
introduce. Last point: Bill, you want to share with us your views on content
filtering?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><br>
Fahad.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
menog-bounces@menog.net [mailto:menog-bounces@menog.net] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Osama
Dosary (dosary)<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 07, 2007 8:47 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Bill Woodcock; Baher Esmat<br>
<b>Cc:</b> menog@menog.net; Salman Al-Mannai; Kais Al-Essa<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>I really like how Bill put it. Now to put
things into perspective with regards to the Saudi market:<br>
- Only the big guys (STC, Bayanat, and ITC) are allowed to peer internationally
because of content filtering role they also perform<br>
- the little guys (who need to peer most) can only do so within Saudi, are
mostly satisfied by the current peering point<br>
So no near change likely to happen for Saudi.<br>
(Are my slides still on the menog site? If they are thye help with Saudi picture.)<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Osama<br>
--<br>
Sent by Mobile Phone on Good Messaging (www.good.com)<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Bill Woodcock [<a href="mailto:woody@pch.net">mailto:woody@pch.net</a>]<br>
Sent: Monday, August 06, 2007 06:58 PM W. Europe Standard Time<br>
To: Baher Esmat<br>
Cc: menog@menog.net; 'Salman Al-Mannai'; 'Kais Al-Essa'<br>
Subject: RE: [menog] RE:
[ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering<br>
<br>
On Mon, 6 Aug 2007, Baher Esmat wrote:<br>
> I must also say that I was a little bit puzzled with
parts of the discussion<br>
> as it appeared to me that we're not differentiating
between the Incumbents<br>
> like STC, Batelco, ect., (those incumbents are also
ISPs) and other smaller<br>
> ISPs. My understanding is that the Incumbents whether
they have bilateral<br>
> peeing among themselves or peer via IXPs, they remain
the big guys who own<br>
> the customers as well as most of the traffic. The small
ISPs on the other<br>
> hand have to have their own IXP setups and hence be in
better positions to<br>
> negotiate better deals with Incumbents, or with
upstream providers if ISPs<br>
> are allowed to connect directly to them.<br>
<br>
Another way of putting it is to say that everyone needs to peer, in order<br>
to grow. The big guys know this (they couldn't have gotten big if they<br>
didn't), and will always peer, whether internationally (in London or<br>
Amsterdam or Hong Kong or elsewhere), or across private bilateral sessions<br>
between each other.<br>
<br>
It's the little guys who need the IXPs, in order to be able to efficiently<br>
compete with that, and peer as well. If the big guys grow, and the little<br>
guys don't, you've got an increase in the digital divide problem. If<br>
everyone grows, the whole market grows, and more new service is available<br>
to all potential customers at lower, more competitive prices.<br>
<br>
-Bill</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>