<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)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<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;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle20
{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'>Best place to raise awareness is a list like this ;) Let’s get
some more players joining up. I’ll personally get PCCW to sign up and join us
and maybe Atheeb ;) Can anyone get Omantel? Players in Yemen? Syria? Jordon?
Iran? Everyone else? Let’s get people involved and then let’s work on raising
their awareness levels so we can all get to where we want.<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'>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>
<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"'> Nasser A. Albakr
[mailto:nbakr@citc.gov.sa] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, August 08, 2007 11:46 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Fahad AlShirawi; Osama Dosary (dosary); menog@menog.net; Bill
Woodcock<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 class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Hello all,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>To elaborate on what Osama said, one of the main CITC missions is
to “<i>promote competition and act as a safeguard for public interest and
stakeholders rights</i>”. In other words, we need to protect the competitors
and try to make the IT market fair. Having any company or business entering the
market with out following regulation, standards, and protecting the rights of
others even if it was a productive and innovative effort will effect the
balance. Some of the License holders have made billions of dollars investment
in the Saudi market according to their vision. To introduce a new player or
competitor to the market just like that is destruction to the company and might
cause a financial unbalance to the IT market.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>There is an IT booming in the region, but lets not forget that it’s
still young. Proper education and nurturing is required to end up with healthy
market. Else, we will end up with –just as Fahad has said- repeating mistakes.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>As for the business model of IT companies, I think it’s hard to
enforce anyone to a cretin direction from the regulator perspective. However,
with proper education, companies will follow the right direction, and that is
the effort that we should (as thinkers) should present again, and again until
they do. The peering for example, the word (free service) seems to scare every
IT investors and make them avoid even thinking about this service. Once they
players realize the return benefits of peering, they can go with it. So I would
like to repeat what has Osama said, we need to raise the awareness!<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>-----------------------<br>
Nasser A. Albakr
nbakr@citc.gov.sa<br>
Senior Network & System Specialist<br>
Communication and Information Technology Commission (CITC)<span
style='color:navy'><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";
color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center>
</div>
<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"'> Fahad AlShirawi
[mailto:fahad@2connectbahrain.com] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:22 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'Osama Dosary (dosary)'; Nasser A. Albakr; menog@menog.net; 'Bill
Woodcock'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Oh absolutely. I don’t agree with too much or too little. That’s
why I love the network rollout bit!<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, while I don’t agree with the rest of it, I think it’s far
better than the situation in Bahrain. <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'>As to peering, you can never force it. Get things right and
peering will take on a life of it’s own.<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'>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>
<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"'> Osama Dosary
(dosary) [mailto:dosary@cisco.com] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 07, 2007 10:17 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Fahad AlShirawi; Nasser A. Albakr; menog@menog.net; Bill Woodcock<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'>Hello Fahad,<br>
Just to add another perspective to this issue: too much deregulation can also
be very negative from many aspects including market health.<br>
I've read of many examples to this, but the closest that comes to mind is what
happened in the early stages of Saudi internet, when 25 ISP licenses were
issued. Only a fraction of them were able to financially break even. That's not
healthy.<br>
Now, we have more than 50 licenses issued. But the situation might be better
than it was (at least I hope). The main differences are: easier license,
cheaper bandwidth, and the force to change old ISP business models because of
the looming fear of the sleeping DSP giants.<br>
Lets take it easy on CITC, I think overall they are doing a good job.<br>
As far as peering goes I know that CITC is encouraging it, and it is important
to them.<br>
But sometimes its not a good idea to force peering or IX participation.<br>
I'm sure Bill or Phil address this point better.<br>
Let me just add a plug for MENOG: We need to all encourage our colleges and all
those regionly involved in the Internet to participate in the next MENOG to
help raise awareness of such important issues.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Osama<br>
--<br>
Sent by Mobile Phone on Good Messaging (www.good.com)<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Fahad AlShirawi [<a href="mailto:fahad@2connectbahrain.com">mailto:fahad@2connectbahrain.com</a>]<br>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 03:22 PM W. Europe Standard Time<br>
To: 'Nasser A. Albakr'; menog@menog.net; 'Bill Woodcock'<br>
Subject: RE: [menog] RE:
[ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering<br>
<br>
Dear Nasser,<br>
<br>
Do you actually expect licensees to be effective competition with<br>
infrastructure development in under five years? Some services will be<br>
launched quickly, but really effective competition? It will take at least<br>
that long.<br>
<br>
Let me ask you this, Verizon is one of the licensees. Do you think their<br>
business model is built around improved broadband penetration into the<br>
Kingdom, or the US military in the GCC?<br>
<br>
I assure you, they'll launch every service they can make money out off so<br>
that is good. But that is a byproduct of their main interest. The rest is<br>
secondary. Actually, I know a company that is going for the second round of<br>
licenses. Their business plan is flawless. It is amazingly complete and<br>
satisfies all the CITIC requirements.<br>
<br>
They have a secondary business plan. They'll pay you the penalties. They are<br>
not actually going to meet minimum rollout but will continue to pay the fees<br>
which are cheaper and will focus purely on MPLS product which they have a<br>
ready customer base for. I can't tell you who it is as I am under<br>
disclosure. But who knows how many others have the same idea in their mind?<br>
<br>
What will happen then? Personally, I'd like to lobby for a few licenses<br>
given out to companies with Greenfield experience that agree to the minimum<br>
commitment and say a bigger fine if they don't meet it? I have to admit,<br>
there are personal motivations there but hey, who of us is not slightly<br>
personally driven ;)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Fahad.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Nasser A. Albakr [<a href="mailto:nbakr@citc.gov.sa">mailto:nbakr@citc.gov.sa</a>]<br>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 3:28 PM<br>
To: Fahad AlShirawi; menog@menog.net; Bill Woodcock<br>
Subject: RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Fahad,<br>
<br>
For CITC, we listen to all the players in the country and the region. We<br>
have cases where regulation changed or even a new license was introduced<br>
driven by innovative ideas from small business and productive minds.<br>
Changes should not be feared, but we should have big concerns for the<br>
pauses and the inconsistence of the IT evolvement in the region.<br>
<br>
COLT just like current DSPs (putting aside the monopoly state we had<br>
before) have started small at 1992 and it took it almost 5 years before<br>
it can even compete in Europe. The DSPs here are all from an ISP or IT<br>
companies background.<br>
<br>
I have to say again that sharing the experience and exchanging<br>
information between the main players in the region will help a lot in<br>
-not only- having a better structured operation, but well also make us<br>
avoid mistakes.<br>
<br>
So -everyone- please do share :-)<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
-----------------------<br>
Nasser A. Albakr
nbakr@citc.gov.sa<br>
Senior Network & System Specialist<br>
Communication and Information Technology Commission (CITC)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Fahad AlShirawi [<a href="mailto:fahad@2connectbahrain.com">mailto:fahad@2connectbahrain.com</a>]<br>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 2:58 PM<br>
To: Nasser A. Albakr; menog@menog.net; 'Bill Woodcock'<br>
Subject: RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering<br>
<br>
Nasser,<br>
<br>
I know about the bid. However, regulation dictates minimum size that is<br>
not<br>
reasonable if you are expecting entrepreneurs and people who have the<br>
will<br>
and innovative mindset to bring something new to what is the largest and<br>
potentially the best Greenfield in the region. Let me give you an<br>
example:<br>
Colt. How large where they when they started? Under CITIC rules, they<br>
would<br>
have never been able to start.<br>
<br>
They run one of the best networks in Europe and are a great partner.<br>
Personally, I have a lot of praise for CITIC's minimum rollout<br>
requirements.<br>
I think those are more than enough to insure that no 'bottlenecks' exist<br>
and<br>
insure that the mistakes of other markets are not repeated. But I think<br>
Saudi made the other extreme of the same mistake made in Bahrain and I<br>
think<br>
it will hurt long term.<br>
<br>
<br>
Maybe we can get input from others?<br>
<br>
<br>
Fahad.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Nasser A. Albakr [<a href="mailto:nbakr@citc.gov.sa">mailto:nbakr@citc.gov.sa</a>]<br>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 2:42 PM<br>
To: Fahad AlShirawi; menog@menog.net; Bill Woodcock<br>
Subject: RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Fahad,<br>
<br>
I agree with you, this is a one of the lessons we have learned from<br>
KACST days, and after the movement of the Internet Gateway service to<br>
the three Data Service Providers (DSPs). The incumbents do not drive<br>
innovation and initiatives. That's why the effort and the change should<br>
be driven by the regulator and the incumbents side by side. This effort<br>
should come with the understanding of the benefit of an IXP. Even other<br>
players should be involved (Academic and Educational organizations,<br>
ISPs, IT Companies, Vendors, etc).<br>
<br>
Large companies should handle liberalization of the Internet Gateway and<br>
International landing. Otherwise, we will end up with small players that<br>
are causing bottlenecks and reducing the quality and reliability. Here<br>
is SA, there is a massive increase in the IT market. I think the main<br>
benefit that Saudi will introduce to the region is connecting the GCC to<br>
the rest of the ME.<br>
<br>
As for the regulation and the licenses for international and landing<br>
operations, there was a bid for a Fixed Telecom License that was<br>
released last April. The license gives its holder the ability to enter<br>
the DSP market along with other services. Three other companies were<br>
qualified for that, and others can apply in upcoming stages:<br>
<a
href="http://www.citc.gov.sa/citcportal/SimpleText/tabid/103/cmspid/%7B92547EA">http://www.citc.gov.sa/citcportal/SimpleText/tabid/103/cmspid/%7B92547EA</a><br>
E-40E7-4CB2-BAD2-672B6CBAF7D8%7D/Default.aspx<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
---------------------------<br>
Nasser A. Albakr
nbakr@citc.gov.sa<br>
Senior Network & System Specialist<br>
Communication and Information Technology Commission (CITC)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Fahad AlShirawi [<a href="mailto:fahad@2connectbahrain.com">mailto:fahad@2connectbahrain.com</a>]<br>
Sent: 7/Aug/2007 12:58 PM<br>
To: Nasser A. Albakr; menog@menog.net; 'Bill Woodcock'<br>
Subject: RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering<br>
<br>
Nasser,<br>
<br>
On point of major import is that innovation, even when old and basically<br>
a<br>
no-brainer in the rest of the world, is hardly ever driven by larger<br>
incumbents. The regulation in Saudi dictates that only incumbents, or<br>
operators so large and overwhelmed with their internal politics, are<br>
welcome<br>
for the full liberalization in the Kingdom.<br>
<br>
One of our fellow members (can't remember who off the top of my head)<br>
commented that Saudi is the largest ISP market and that it's usage far<br>
exceeds the rest of MENA. That is true. Saudi has the critical mass to<br>
make<br>
things happen and to give a solid business case to derive a technical<br>
dream.<br>
Will the regulation change any time soon? Why are there only three<br>
licenses<br>
for international Landing? Can't we have more? That is one market that<br>
needs<br>
to be opened up if we are to see IXs flourish.<br>
<br>
<br>
Fahad.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: menog-bounces@menog.net [<a href="mailto:menog-bounces@menog.net">mailto:menog-bounces@menog.net</a>]
On Behalf<br>
Of<br>
Nasser A. Albakr<br>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:16 PM<br>
To: menog@menog.net; Bill Woodcock<br>
Subject: RE: [menog] RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Peering<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Hello all,<br>
<br>
I agree with you, everyone needs to peer and will end up doing that<br>
eventually, with or with out an IX. However, it seems because of the<br>
high competition in the market, not having a high demand on national<br>
data transfer, and no return profit from providing this facility non of<br>
the main players are interested. Otherwise, we would have seen an IXP or<br>
even peering on the GCC region years ago. What we have ended up with is<br>
a group of providers who share the same landing point but exchange<br>
traffic over their transit providers at least one continent away.<br>
<br>
In Saudi Arabia after the liberalization of the Internet Gateway almost<br>
a year ago and having 3 main Data Service Provider instead of one, non<br>
of them has decided to invest in starting an IX or peer with the other<br>
providers. This caused customers to have DSP to DSP connection problems,<br>
where the traffic goes to the Internet Provider and back to the other<br>
DSP, as you mentioned digital divide problem on the country level.<br>
<br>
Here at CITC (as a regulator) we are more concern with the quality of<br>
service and reliability of the traffic and data transfer with in the<br>
country and how can the peering of the main players (DSPs) and/or having<br>
an IX will improve that. The players (even on the GCC and ME level) must<br>
realize the benefits, how will that reduce the international expenses<br>
and drive other services to them. Some have come to that conclusion and<br>
have started working on that. However, everyone should catch up and<br>
participate.<br>
<br>
Such meetings and discussions are good opportunity in passing knowledge<br>
and sharing the findings. My guess is that everyone is waiting for<br>
everyone to make a move. In addition, the smaller players (ISPs,<br>
companies, etc.) are waiting for the quality to increase and the cost to<br>
decrease in order to but more effort on the local content and data<br>
transfer, and having a free peering and IXP(s) in the region will<br>
produce that.<br>
<br>
As for the question where should the IXP be, I agree with Bill and the<br>
others. An IXP or more should be introduced in each country and<br>
connected to the other country's IXPs. This is the logical way and how<br>
it was done in other regions (Europe, Africa, etc). Waiting for all<br>
parties to agree on a central point will take forever. However, it is<br>
not the quantity that we are looking for here, but the distribution and<br>
quality of the IXPs (not only GCC but in ME region).<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
----------------------------------------------------------<br>
Nasser A. Albakr
nbakr@citc.gov.sa<br>
Senior Network & System Specialist<br>
Communication and Information Technology Commission (CITC)<br>
<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: menog-bounces@menog.net [<a href="mailto:menog-bounces@menog.net">mailto:menog-bounces@menog.net</a>]
On Behalf<br>
Of Bill Woodcock<br>
Sent: 6/Aug/2007 7:50 PM<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>
<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<br>
discussion<br>
> as it appeared to me that we're not differentiating
between the<br>
Incumbents<br>
> like STC, Batelco, ect., (those incumbents are also
ISPs) and<br>
other smaller<br>
> ISPs. My understanding is that the Incumbents whether
they have<br>
bilateral<br>
> peeing among themselves or peer via IXPs, they remain
the big guys<br>
who own<br>
> the customers as well as most of the traffic. The small
ISPs on<br>
the other<br>
> hand have to have their own IXP setups and hence be in
better<br>
positions to<br>
> negotiate better deals with Incumbents, or with
upstream providers<br>
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<br>
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<br>
sessions<br>
between each other.<br>
<br>
It's the little guys who need the IXPs, in order to be able to<br>
efficiently<br>
compete with that, and peer as well. If the big guys grow, and the<br>
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<br>
available<br>
to all potential customers at lower, more competitive prices.<br>
<br>
-Bill</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>