Jean-François Mezei wrote:
>> For instance, out of Australia we have a single, old cable going West
>> out of Perth to Singapore (SEA-ME-WE3) which allows only low speed
>> circuits,
>
> Was there any thought about building cables to singapore from darwin now
> that it has had fibre links to t
Jean-François Mezei wrote:
Did western europe ever really have a primary route via the USA to reach
asia ? (I realise that during the cable cuts in middle east last year,
traffic might have been rerouted via USA but this would be a temporary
situation).
Yes.
And the main issue is not technical
On 15/09/2008, at 10:36 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
On 14 Sep 2008, at 23:38, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Other cable systems predated FLAG (at least for voice).
The qualifier might be important.
As should have been obvious from all the IIRCs and related
qualifiers in my note, I wasn't in Europ
On 15/09/2008, at 10:06 PM, Joe Abley wrote:
As an example, PacRimEast still had capacity in the late 90s,
strictly speaking. But given the difficulty in ordering anything
other than E1s on it at that time, did it really exist as a
terrestrial option for New Zealand ISPs trying to send pa
On 15 Sep 2008, at 05:40, Jim Mercer wrote:
there is an exchange http://emix.ae, however, when i last interacted
with
them several years ago, it was a relatively closed club.
Unless things have changed recently, it's more of a monopoly transit
provider than an exchange point. It's a servi
Hi Francois,
The answer is yes. The cost of reaching Asian via the US was and is still much
lower than via the cables that hug the Africain cost.
And since Europe had a lot of traffic terminating in the US, it made more sense
to throw it all that way than split into two major routes.
Finall
On 14 Sep 2008, at 23:38, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Other cable systems predated FLAG (at least for voice).
The qualifier might be important.
As should have been obvious from all the IIRCs and related qualifiers
in my note, I wasn't in Europe at the time I started paying attention
to th
Fiber opic capacity from to Europe to Asia via the African cost has always been
quite slim by TransAtlantic standards. As I recollect, you have FLAG, SWM3, and
SWM4. Those systems can push multi-terabits. Capacity is not fundamentally the
problem, but rather the lack of competition.
Also you n
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:22:27AM +0100, Alexander Harrowell wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:13 AM, Jim Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > oddly enough, the ISP's in the region have not caught on to the potential
> > winfall of providing cost effective hosting locally, so therefore, the bulk
* Jean-François Mezei:
> Did western europe ever really have a primary route via the USA to reach
> asia ?
It depends where you buy transit from. For instance, I see Baidu
through AT&T, and the traffic is routed through the U.S. Some
Singaporean banks and a few Koran government sites are route
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:13 AM, Jim Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> oddly enough, the ISP's in the region have not caught on to the potential
> winfall of providing cost effective hosting locally, so therefore, the bulk
> of the hosting for companies in the region is primarily done in the US,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- Jim Mercer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>UAE/Dubai is a major landing point for many asian/indian ocean fibers, but
>there is no equivilent of One Wilshire/60 Hudson/etc.
>
>so, as the data finds more and better direct routes to the end user,
>redu
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 06:11:28AM +0530, Murtaza wrote:
> Nothing if the reason isn't to avoid the US to prevent interception. ie.
> my point was the people are doing this for engineering reasons not
> political ones as was implied by that article.
>
> I don't see it sinister even if someone wa
Other cable systems predated FLAG (at least for voice).
SEA-ME-WE predates FLAG by almost a decade. I'm sure some digging
would reveal a bit more on that path either submarine or terrestrial.
MMC
On 15/09/2008, at 11:06 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
On 14 Sep 2008, at 19:41, Jean-François Mezei
On 14 Sep 2008, at 19:41, Jean-François Mezei wrote:
Did western europe ever really have a primary route via the USA to
reach
asia ?
Yes, I think so. If I remember correctly, before FLAG started laying
cables, there was no terrestrial route to Asia from Europe that didn't
involve North
On 15/09/2008, at 10:46 AM, Jean-François Mezei wrote:
Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Most Asian providers (at least Northern Asia) use USA, Atlantic
path to
get to Europe. The capacity going Westt isn't that high in
comparision,
so the extra latency hit is well offset by the much reduced co
Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
> Most Asian providers (at least Northern Asia) use USA, Atlantic path to
> get to Europe. The capacity going Westt isn't that high in comparision,
> so the extra latency hit is well offset by the much reduced cost.
I take it voice would have priority for use of the
But, it still is impossible in many asses, as ISPs in many countries are
still not cooperating with each other.
But, it still is impossible in many cases,
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 6:11 AM, Murtaza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Nothing if the reason isn't to avoid the US to prevent interception. ie
Nothing if the reason isn't to avoid the US to prevent interception. ie.
my point was the people are doing this for engineering reasons not
political ones as was implied by that article.
I don't see it sinister even if someone wants to avoid US due to
interception. But, yes I agree people are do
> For instance, out of Australia we have a single, old cable going West out of
> Perth to Singapore (SEA-ME-WE3) which allows only low speed circuits, but
> we've got almost 4 (as of next year) cables going North and East out of
> Sydney. So most Europe traffic to/from Australia is via the USA.
Pardon my ignorance here, but isn't this more of a case of traffic
growing outside of the USA which means that traffic within the USA
represents a smaller share of the total internet traffic ?
I suspect so - especially with CDN/Content providers pushing traffic out
to the edge it means that
Jamie A Lawrence wrote:
What exactly would be sinister about moving traffic through routes
that didn't intersect the U.S. border?
Nothing if the reason isn't to avoid the US to prevent interception.
ie. my point was the people are doing this for engineering reasons not
political ones as
Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/30/business/30pipes.html?partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
Pardon my ignorance here, but isn't this more of a case of traffic
growing outside of the USA which means that traffic within the USA
represents a smaller share of the total
I don't think any of this will be because of sinister reasons, just
for good engineering reasons and probably just to guarantee,
without a doubt, that your circuit does NOT go through One Wilshire!
What exactly would be sinister about moving traffic through routes
that didn't intersect the
Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
I don't think any of this will be because of sinister reasons, just
for good engineering reasons and probably just to guarantee, without a
doubt, that your circuit does NOT go through One Wilshire!
Just to ensure no confusion - this was just about redundancy and
d
I think it began a while ago, but I suspect it'll increase. There's now
two trans-Russian terrestrial systems, and more investment in Asia -
Europe cables. Initially the capacity will be used for redundancy and
to shorten latencies (ie. just to go around the other way and because
it's quicke
26 matches
Mail list logo
