- NZNOG - lists.nznog.org

Alternative to Running Cable down SH1
by Tikiri Wickramasingha 25 May '04

25 May '04

On Tue, 2004-05-25 at 01:53, Craig Spiers wrote: <snip> > > > > We could all possibly grab every redundant 10mbit hub in NZ and connect them > down SH1 through the north island and call it CountryLink ? > > Add up all those offcuts of Cat5 plus these redundant hubs, we could start > our own national ISP with VoIP ;) > A bit more viable - has anyone checked out the Helios project. Granted it crashed but NASA is prototyping a few newer and better ones. NASA Helios - remotely piloted, solar powered, extreme high altitude aircraft capable of carying a payload simillar to a small satelite. Uses Fuel Cells to store power generated by solar panels. It is designed to stay in the air forever. Wing Span approximately the size of a B-52 Bomber. Cost if I rememebr right was a couple million dollars. But that is a fraction of what running fibre all the way down SH1 would cost. Here is the link http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/ > > _______________________________________________ > NZNOG mailing list > NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz > http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog

6 7

Peering.
by Simon Lyall 25 May '04

25 May '04

Little story here by Juha: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3568316&thesection=busin… Looks like Telecom and Telstra are trying to put on a squeeze in order to make a couple more thousand per month. I'm a little surprised at the timing, Telecom has a bit of an advantage right now since it's got a monopoly on ADSL bandwidth but bitstream is only a few months away (allegedly) so it's going to be a lot easier for ADSL customers to switch pretty soon. Telstra doesn't even have that sort of leverage. I'd advise companies that are currently not connected to WIX or APE and are instead replying on the two companies above to deliver their National bandwidth to keep close tabs on things. If it suddenly costs ISPs thousands of dollars to send traffic to your site then the ISP (or whatever) is going to start looking hard are their benefits in the relationship (and remember this thousands is going to Telecom/Telstra not you). People like TVNZ . The Herald, TV3 etc who want to deliver bandwidth intensive content should take note especially. ISPs won't be able to afford to let customers watch your content all day if they are paying real money for a Telecom or Telstra circuit. And the circuit they do buy will be as small as possible. And remember if you connect to APE or WIX you have the choice of additional International bandwidth suppliers which will at least give you the chance to negotiate your next International bill down a little even if you stay with your existing Telco. It's a shame that Telecom and Telstra are basicly telling the Xtra and Paradise customers that the customers access to fast National content is less important than making a few thousand extra ( $50,000 tops, maybe ) on National bandwidth charges. Much as some sites don't offer bandwidth intensive services to International users they might be soon forced to not offer them to some (or all) National users. -- Simon J. Lyall. | Very Busy | Mail: simon(a)darkmere.gen.nz "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.

20 38

hfr
by Thomas 25 May '04

25 May '04

hope you've all got your orders in http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps5763/index.html maybe citylink could buy a few for the collisionnet network. although the stm-256 modules only seem to have short-haul optics. bah humbug thomas

1 0

Allied Telesys Media Converter
by Drew Broadley 25 May '04

25 May '04

Hi all, Does someone happen to have a used Allied Telesys twin-fibre (100base-FX) to rj45 (100base-TX) media converter for lend or sale? We are having issues with our telstraclear circuit link and telstraclear keep throwing us the same brand different model converter. We have had issues with two media converters now and I wish to experiment with another brand (specifically Allied Telesys, as word of advice from a technician at Inspire who solved their issues) Can you please contact me off list or onlist to discuss any others that have had the same problems with these Transition media convertors. Cheers, Drew

2 1

Re: [nznog] Peering.
by Brian Gibbons 24 May '04

24 May '04

>From: "Drew Broadley" <drew(a)corrupt.co.nz> >We could all possibly grab every redundant 10mbit hub >in NZ and connect them down SH1 through the north island >and call it CountryLink ? OK, CityLink now runs CountryLink, and every NZ ISP is connected via a single peering exchange. CountyLink should then write to TelestraClear explaining the change in topology and how much it is going to cost TelstraClear to connect to CountryLink for "Domestic Peering", a per MB charge would seem appropriate. Cheers BG

7 8

Re: [nznog] Peering.
by Richard Naylor 24 May '04

24 May '04

At 03:28 p.m. 25/05/2004 +1200, Paul Brislen wrote: >If you (Customer A) set up a video server in Invercargil >(JuhaDownCountry.com) that for whatever reason got a lot of traffic, the >telcos would have to install new capacity/servers/gear/etc to cope with the >demand and they would need to recoup that cost from you, Customer A. being the owner of several video servers I can reply on this one. If you use the model they mention then Peter Jackson would have to pay the Embassy to screen his movies as well as the Embassy charging the public to watch. To give you a very real example. LOTR-3 Premiere. We got paid nothing for webcasting the event. Based on the extra traffic that went to TCL, they earned $250,000 in 5 hours of webcast. Not small change. TCNZ would have earned around $500,000 had they peered properly. The others probably earned around another $250,000 Had we not anycast LOTR-3 we would have had to pay our ISP. We deliberately engineered it to avoid that possibility, having accidentally generated a huge bill the year before. Yes a telco would have to install capacity to my server, but if they peer properly its for the traffic requests generated by their customers that runs over that peering link. Its exactly why all my servers are at exchanges, so that ISPs can get to the content with the least effort and cost. rich

2 1

Re: [nznog] Peering.
by Richard Naylor 24 May '04

24 May '04

At 05:16 p.m. 25/05/2004 +1200, Juha Saarinen wrote: >You're kidding? no - its for real >Oh hang on, you mean that TCL charged their customers some $250k, etc, not >that you paid them to send the data to their customers? looking at the incremental traffic flows and using TCL traffic charges, we estimate they earned $250k in 5 hours. We didn't get paid. But the beer from TV3 was nice ;-) rich

1 0

RE: [nznog] Peering.
by Regan Murphy 24 May '04

24 May '04

> Looks like Telecom and Telstra are trying to put on a squeeze > in order to make a couple more thousand per month. > > I'm a little surprised at the timing, Telecom has a bit of an > advantage right now since it's got a monopoly on ADSL > bandwidth but bitstream is only a few months away (allegedly) > so it's going to be a lot easier for ADSL customers to switch > pretty soon. > > Telstra doesn't even have that sort of leverage. If TelstraClear put a bit of time and effort into selling their services and retaining existing customers than putting all their fight into peering and local loop unbundling they would be a lot better off than they are now I'm sure. I have heard from several people who have had trouble buying products from them - both voice and data (business) - and have had endless troubles finding someone to return their calls. The unlucky ones to have actually bought their products from TelstraClear then have trouble getting service out of the Account Reps which seem to turnover several times a year... Clear was a great company but unfortunately they have been ruined. -- Regan

4 3

RE: [nznog] Peering.
by Craig Spiers 24 May '04

24 May '04

Let's call it.. CollisionNet :) -----Original Message----- From: Drew Broadley [mailto:drew(a)corrupt.co.nz] Sent: Tuesday, 25 May 2004 1:51 p.m. To: Brian Gibbons Cc: Craig Spiers; 'Juha Saarinen'; 'Jeremy Brooking'; 'nznog' Subject: Re: [nznog] Peering. Brian Gibbons wrote: >>From: "Craig Spiers" <craig(a)concept.net.nz> If telstraclear, was to >>stop peering at APE, and remove 'ports and connections to there' >>wouldn't that limit them to only having 'domestic' data inside their >>own network? >> >> > >This looks more like an attempt to change NZ from a Peering model to a >Tiered model, perhaps Telstra think they have the best backbone in NZ >and might be able to monopolise on it :) > >I am not completely familiar with the WIX/APE Topology, is there a >dedicated circuit between the two to carry domestic traffic? > >If not, is it possible that domestic traffic could traverse both APE >and WIX via TCL peering circuits to each? > We could all possibly grab every redundant 10mbit hub in NZ and connect them down SH1 through the north island and call it CountryLink ? Add up all those offcuts of Cat5 plus these redundant hubs, we could start our own national ISP with VoIP ;)

2 1

Re: [nznog] Peering.
by Jeremy Brooking 24 May '04

24 May '04

Craig Spiers wrote: > Let's call it.. CollisionNet :) > For SH1... Thats rather appropriate :)

1 0