On Tuesday 21 April 2009 11:59:17 am McTim wrote: > My reading of SEACOM's offering is that they will sell > you a port in Jinja for the above price.
An IPLC port or an IP port? I'm guessing the former. > Now, how they > cross the border (and how they get from Kisumu or > Eldoret, where there is dark fiber) to Busia AND how they > cross the border/operate networks on both sides is a > regulatory bridge they seemed to have crossed. They must > have really good policy folk, or tossed some cash around. I've not seen a SEACOM offer, but if you can get that price from Jinja up to an interconnect site in Europe, the Middle East or India, it's a good start. But you still have to contract someone else for backhaul between Jinja and your node in Kampala, or wherever your nearest PoP is. That, the extra cost of the IP port at the Z-end and the interconnect between SEACOM and the cable system at the Z-end is where the money goes. Yes, SEACOM can probably provide you with a single quotation for all segments of the circuit, but if you ask them to break it down circuit by circuit, you'd be surprised how much you're only paying for what SEACOM really controls. > These prices may be pure fiction, but they will be lower > than 1k USD per Meg/month. I should hope so :-). I think what's been advertised by most of the cable consortia building to the coast is a peak of US$500.00/Mbps. But again, check to see what this price does and does not include. > Well, it doesn't seem like it'll be the case that one > could pick it up at UIXP, but Jinja is on their network > map. I generally wouldn't consider the UIXP as a PoP - just a peering point. This comes back to the discussion we've had on this and the UIXP mailing list about having a carrier-neutral data centre where interconnects between providers and carriers using the SEACOM and other coastal cable systems are done. That data centre would be the city PoP. Without this PoP, UTL, MTN and whoever else is a landing party will have to run some spool to your premises for you to hook up to the cable system. > no, but for GSM backhaul in remote areas, it's a market > mover, certainly. I was referring to the technical merits of fibre vs. satellite. Of course, if you're looking at greater coverage, satellite is still a winner here. > Time will tell, innit. Which is what we don't have :-). Time will tell in terms of bringing the price lower and improving reliability. However, with a US$300.00 - US$500.00 price cap per Mbps, it's a good place to start to set ourselves up and prepare for the future. Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ 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. ---------------------------------------
