if we're throwing in 2cents: - If there is documentation available about the IX, like IP ranges, configs that everybody should know about etc. maybe the website is a better place to fix them instead of mailinglist archives. - As MTN has just started to promote their hosting, their incentive for a healthy IX should have gone up, right? Any competition coming up in this area? Same thing, you can keep your traffic locally if the IX works. - Should the stats be coming from the IX operators or from the sysops in the IX clients (which i believe, partly is you)? If you can show your boss: hey, this is what went over the local (cheap) connection, and this was congesting your expensive satelite, i'm sure they can tell the difference.
Or more simple: the only way that Internet Technology is going to be a success here, is when there is at least 1 IX. This is a fact that has been proven in almost all other countries in the world, so discussing it, with whomever is useless. As the success of IT is directly related to our jobs, we all better work on or lobby for or do whatever to make sure that thing works. Right? On Saturday 29 July 2006 10:07, Mike Barnard wrote: > to the best of my knowledge, the list archives are there, i was going > through them some time back.... > > but to highlight something here about the IX state....people may be pulling > out because the do not have much or any local traffic to exchange at the IX, > others may be pulling out, because, like Richard said, management does not > see how the IX is helping....due to lack of stats. > > one thing is for sure, if the IX remains in the state it is in, many more > will pull out. its not yet a matter of congestion at the IX. currently, i > believe, there are a few guys peering there, MTN, UTL, one2net, Infocom, > African Online. the rest....i dont know if they were ever there or if they > pulled out. i do not think that five guys at the IX can congest it...unless > the routing being done there is horrible. > > one more thing we need to look at is the condition of the room that we hold > this equipment in. ummm the dust in there is too much, the patch panels need > a face life...actually they may need to be re-done. a lot of work needs to > be done to get that small network back to shape. of course there is that > small matter of people walking in there and doing what they want to do with > out caring about others machines... > > basics is probably what we need to go back to.... > > my 2 cents > > On 7/28/06, Ronald Nsubuga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 7/28/06, Mikisa Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > > > >On Friday 28 July 2006 13:52, Richard Mikisa wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>will quote Badru's email ... > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >Thanks Richard. > > > > > > > >Perhaps just to throw something on the wall; MTN have tons of > > > >fibre in the city. Can't an arrangement be reached where some > > > >kind of Metro-E service is provided to ISP's for the purpose of > > > >100Mbps connectivity to the exchange point? Politics and all > > > >that aside, all MTN need is an 802.1Q trunk to the exchange > > > >point, and each ISP jumping onto their Metro-E somewhere in the > > > >loop. > > > > > > > >Failing that, don't Space Net lay fibre? Can they build a Metro-E > > > >network specifically for this purpose, or build fibre for each > > > >ISP to the exchange point (more costly). > > > > > > > >Cheers, > > > > > > > >Mark. > > > > > > > > > > > Good point but that's assuming that the connectivity to the IX is the > > > problem. I believe that's just part of the problem. We need to go back > > > to basics and re-convince 'management' that connectivity to the IX is > > > good for us. At the moment, it's proving really hard since we don't have > > > any stats to speak of despite the fact that the IX has been around or > > > awhile now. That's why we see things like routers being pulled from the > > > IX to be put to 'better' use elsewhere and links to the IX not being a > > > priority when they go down. Techies too need to realize the importance > > > and help keep routes and prefixes update .. which is not happening at > > > the moment. Once we get these going, then we can start looking at links > > > and capacity. > > > > > > -- > > > Richard > > > > > > There was list for [EMAIL PROTECTED] don't know what really happened.. > > > > Thats right somebody willing to offer a list where we can reload the > > discussions (old archives ) so that we clean out the IX that will make life > > alittle bit easier when it comes to solving problems regarding the IX issues > > and keeping routes, prefixes up to date, otherwise it might seem to be a > > little harder when we can't communicate. > > > > > > --------- > > Everything can be achieved as long you can do what it takes to achieve it! > > " The More Things Change The More Things Stay The Same " > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > > LUG mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug > > %LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ > > > > The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including > > attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. > > --------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug %LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
