TelstraClear Inhternational / National Traffic billing
Hi guys - I just spent 5 minutes talking to Telstra in between 45 minutes of working while on hold... The question I asked was: If TelstraClear go ahead with cutting the links to a couple of big national network access points (I was speaking to a non-tech), what will happen to the national / international traffic billing. This person had zero clue but came back ten minutes later and stated she'd been talking to someone that knew exactly what I was talking about. His statement was that "Shortly the International / National traffic distinction will be phased out and there will be only one class of traffic. The cost will be similar to the current International rate. But don't worry since it only matters if you go over your limit" (The lady relayed his comment and that's as close to a direct quote as I can recall) Does this mean that TelstraClear are going to adopt the Telecom Jetstream traffic charging model? Anyone in the know care to correct me if I was given false information by junior Telstra Staff? Or, horribly, was this statement correct? (I specifically wanted to know what would happen to my national / international charging if TelstraClear cut their peering, and it appears they do in fact have a plan to make sure the consumer experiences no confusion over what's National or International traffic) Cheers - Neil G NOTICE: This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error please notify Allied Telesyn Research Ltd immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender has the authority to issue and specifically states them to be the views of Allied Telesyn Research.
neil gardner wrote:
Hi guys - I just spent 5 minutes talking to Telstra in between 45 minutes of working while on hold... The question I asked was:
If TelstraClear go ahead with cutting the links to a couple of big national network access points (I was speaking to a non-tech), what will happen to the national / international traffic billing. This person had zero clue but came back ten minutes later and stated she'd been talking to someone that knew exactly what I was talking about.
His statement was that "Shortly the International / National traffic distinction will be phased out and there will be only one class of traffic. The cost will be similar to the current International rate. But don't worry since it only matters if you go over your limit" (The lady relayed his comment and that's as close to a direct quote as I can recall)
Does this mean that TelstraClear are going to adopt the Telecom Jetstream traffic charging model? Anyone in the know care to correct me if I was given false information by junior Telstra Staff?
Or, horribly, was this statement correct?
(I specifically wanted to know what would happen to my national / international charging if TelstraClear cut their peering, and it appears they do in fact have a plan to make sure the consumer experiences no confusion over what's National or International traffic)
Most likely correct. Has it not sunk in yet that after November 1st, peering in NZ will be gone? Unless of course non-telco providers get their corporate derrieres into the sling and start networking with one another. -- Juha
Has it not sunk in yet that after November 1st, peering in NZ will be gone? Unless of course non-telco providers get their corporate derrieres into the sling and start networking with one another.
--
I'm pretty sure its only the TCNZ->ISP's which the peering will be disconnected, but the TCNZ -> other National Carriers will still be there.. So instead of going for example with a Telecom Customer. ISP->Clear (Across APE)->Clear->Clear Customer It will go ISP->Telecom National->Clear (their Peering with Telecom) ->Clear Customer. All this will mean is people will have to buy more domestic Bandwidth via their national carrier. What I've seen is people 100% rely on their APE/WIX peering for the Bandwdith so if it goes down then they don't have enough bandwidth via their National Links via their Carrier (This is what happened to Trademe) Thanks Craig
Craig Whitmore wrote:
ISP->Clear (Across APE)->Clear->Clear Customer It will go
ISP->Telecom National->Clear (their Peering with Telecom) ->Clear Customer.
All this will mean is people will have to buy more domestic Bandwidth via their national carrier.
So... that's all fine then? No additional costs to be absorbed or passed onto customers, and performance will stay the same?
What I've seen is people 100% rely on their APE/WIX peering for the Bandwdith so if it goes down then they don't have enough bandwidth via their National Links via their Carrier (This is what happened to Trademe)
One way of looking at it, I suppose. -- Juha
I think the point is, larger ISP's see themselves as the "national carrier" as opposed to having to buy from a de-facto "national carrier". ( ie, full blown Telco ) -----Original Message----- From: Juha Saarinen [mailto:juha(a)saarinen.org] Sent: Tuesday, 15 June 2004 11:37 a.m. To: Craig Whitmore Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] TelstraClear Inhternational / National Traffic billing Craig Whitmore wrote:
ISP->Clear (Across APE)->Clear->Clear Customer It will go
ISP->Telecom National->Clear (their Peering with Telecom) ->Clear ISP->Customer.
All this will mean is people will have to buy more domestic Bandwidth via their national carrier.
So... that's all fine then? No additional costs to be absorbed or passed onto customers, and performance will stay the same?
What I've seen is people 100% rely on their APE/WIX peering for the Bandwdith so if it goes down then they don't have enough bandwidth via their National Links via their Carrier (This is what happened to Trademe)
One way of looking at it, I suppose. -- Juha _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
So... that's all fine then? No additional costs to be absorbed or passed onto customers, and performance will stay the same?
The speeds that people get connections to APE and WIX are usually a lot higher than they normally buy nationally via their Carrier (100M and 1000M connections are common at APE/WIX as getting a MetroIP/Tangent/Whatever connections to these places is a lot less cost than getting it via your Carrier. So for an ISP who has peering at APE with Clear and has a Clear National Connection will have to increase their National pipe via Clear so all the traffic which went from their to Clear via APE will go over their National one now. (Clear make more $$ and the customer has to pay more $$) For those who have Telecom connection and don't Peer with Clear will have to increase their Telecom National pipe (clear make nothing on this and the ISP has to pay more to $$). I would estimate with most people buying via Telecom (who have APE connections and don't peer with Clear, than over 1/2 their traffic via their national telecom pipe is traffic to/from Clears network) Thanks Craig
So instead of going for example with a Telecom Customer.
ISP->Clear (Across APE)->Clear->Clear Customer It will go
ISP->Telecom National->Clear (their Peering with Telecom) ->Clear ISP->Customer.
What about the case where an ISP has no local links to either Telco's?
They are just connected at APE and WIX and have a connection to an
international provider.
In this scenario they would now have to pay for a link to both Telco's,
which is of course what the Telco's want.
jfp.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Francois Pirus
They shouldn't be connected to the internet at all! They should be shot in the foot for having such poor routing :) NZ > US > NZ :) But yes, they would need a circuit to one of the two telco's (assuming the telco's maintain peering between themselves). -----Original Message----- From: jfp [mailto:jfp(a)clearfield.com] Sent: Tuesday, 15 June 2004 11:52 a.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] TelstraClear Inhternational / National Traffic billing
So instead of going for example with a Telecom Customer.
ISP->Clear (Across APE)->Clear->Clear Customer It will go
ISP->Telecom National->Clear (their Peering with Telecom) ->Clear ISP->Customer.
What about the case where an ISP has no local links to either Telco's?
They are just connected at APE and WIX and have a connection to an
international provider.
In this scenario they would now have to pay for a link to both Telco's,
which is of course what the Telco's want.
jfp.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Francois Pirus
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Craig Whitmore wrote:
I'm pretty sure its only the TCNZ->ISP's which the peering will be disconnected, but the TCNZ -> other National Carriers will still be there..
So instead of going for example with a Telecom Customer.
ISP->Clear (Across APE)->Clear->Clear Customer It will go
ISP->Telecom National->Clear (their Peering with Telecom) ->Clear Customer.
All this will mean is people will have to buy more domestic Bandwidth via their national carrier. What I've seen is people 100% rely on their APE/WIX peering for the Bandwdith so if it goes down then they don't have enough bandwidth via their National Links via their Carrier (This is what happened to Trademe)
From Australia experience the next stage will be for the Teleco's to stop offering National only links. Instead they will *only* offer a N Mb/s pipe that is a combination of National and International.
Say you are a little ISP with a $3000/month 10Mb/s link to APE and paying Sprint $3000/month[1] for a 1Mb/s International link. Telstra now say you must buy a link straight to them for National traffic. What is more they will charge you $2000/month for it but very nicely advertise your networks Internationally and also to Telecom. So Telstra are using their cheap National prices to subsidize their International costs. In the case of this ISP they will probably be under a lot of pressure to get rid of their sprint bandwidth and go for just a Telstra circuit (since just the cost of a link is a high percentage of their costs since they are so small). Sprint will then turn around and try and drop the cost of their links by peering[2] with Telstra for national traffic so they can offer a circuit for comparable costs. Net result is costs increase and the money tends to flow toward larger providers (especially those with hosting + international bandwidth + end customers ). [1] Random number, if you are really paying this much then shop around. [2] Or at least buying cheaply from. -- Simon J. Lyall. | Very Busy | Mail: simon(a)darkmere.gen.nz "To stay awake all night adds a day to your life" - Stilgar | eMT.
On 14 Jun 2004, at 19:19, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Has it not sunk in yet that after November 1st, peering in NZ will be gone? Unless of course non-telco providers get their corporate derrieres into the sling and start networking with one another.
Non-telco providers have been peering with each other for years, and I see no reason to think that they will suddenly stop on November 1. Joe
Joe Abley wrote:
On 14 Jun 2004, at 19:19, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Has it not sunk in yet that after November 1st, peering in NZ will be gone? Unless of course non-telco providers get their corporate derrieres into the sling and start networking with one another.
Non-telco providers have been peering with each other for years, and I see no reason to think that they will suddenly stop on November 1.
The end is nigh.
On 15 Jun 2004, at 08:22, Drew Broadley wrote:
Joe Abley wrote:
On 14 Jun 2004, at 19:19, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Has it not sunk in yet that after November 1st, peering in NZ will be gone? Unless of course non-telco providers get their corporate derrieres into the sling and start networking with one another.
Non-telco providers have been peering with each other for years, and I see no reason to think that they will suddenly stop on November 1.
The end is nigh.
The doomsaying is all very dramatic, but where's the reasoning? If it suddenly costs money to talk to networks which are customers of TCL, it surely makes *more* sense to peer with them directly, not less. Joe
I had a thought (which may not be well thought out - but please bear with me). If TelstraClear (and presumably Telecom's finance people will follow the same logic and do the same) do in fact cut off connections to the major exchanges and instead require ISPs to purchase links to them, would it make sense to purchase (as a group) a large pipe to TelstraClear and Telecom for each Exchange and then share _that_? Although I'm sure working out a fair charging (and fair use) system for this would be less than trivial, wouldn't this make it possible to most efficiently deal with "The Big T's" in terms of their desire to be paid to swap traffic? Or are they going to specifically ban sharing of pipes to make sure everyone has to provision their own pipe with their own headroom and thus extract _EVEN_MORE_ money from them? Damn - I hope I haven't tipped them off... Who am I kidding? The people responsible for this in the first place will have already thought of this. Oh well - nice thought. Cheers - N. Seriously - will provisioning just a couple of big paid links to APE/WIX and then sharing from there make a lot of sense? Are all the "Non Big T" ISPs going to be able to sort out a method of sharing bandwidth and payment or will everyone end up provisioning their own? -----Original Message----- From: Joe Abley [mailto:jabley(a)isc.org] Sent: Wednesday, 16 June 2004 12:26 a.m. To: Drew Broadley Cc: NZ NOG Subject: Re: [nznog] TelstraClear Inhternational / National Traffic billing On 15 Jun 2004, at 08:22, Drew Broadley wrote:
Joe Abley wrote:
On 14 Jun 2004, at 19:19, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Has it not sunk in yet that after November 1st, peering in NZ will be gone? Unless of course non-telco providers get their corporate derrieres into the sling and start networking with one another.
Non-telco providers have been peering with each other for years, and I see no reason to think that they will suddenly stop on November 1.
The end is nigh.
The doomsaying is all very dramatic, but where's the reasoning? If it suddenly costs money to talk to networks which are customers of TCL, it surely makes *more* sense to peer with them directly, not less. Joe _______________________________________________ NZNOG mailing list NZNOG(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
On Tue, 15 Jun 2004, Joe Abley wrote:
On 15 Jun 2004, at 08:22, Drew Broadley wrote:
The end is nigh.
The doomsaying is all very dramatic, but where's the reasoning?
If it suddenly costs money to talk to networks which are customers of TCL, it surely makes *more* sense to peer with them directly, not less.
It sure does. It's helping me rebuild the case to connect to WIX (we currently only peer at APE), as I can show management that there are a number of incidental benefits, and it will cost only fractionally more anyway. It should also encourage the non-telco ISPs to develop content or attract more eyes so that less traffic goes towards the telco ISPs. aj -- Network Operations || noc. +64.9.915.1825 Maxnet || cell. +64.21.639.706
The worst case scenario of course is that if both telco's remove the
price differential between local and international traffic, what you
will find is that all the local hosting will move offshore and there
will be no local content any more.
Looking at it from our point of view we can get our own box in the US
with a 1 Terabyte traffic for US$65/month (and we have one, this is not
theoretical) versus thousands/month locally.
The end user will end up paying for traffic but since they will be
paying the same for local or international they won't care. But the
telco's will suddenly find that most of their traffic will become
international and their actual cost will go up.
This is just short-term thinking by accountants without thinking of the
long-term consequences.
jfp.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Francois Pirus
participants (11)
-
Alastair Johnson -
Craig Spiers -
Craig Whitmore -
Drew Broadley -
jfp -
Joe Abley -
Juha Saarinen -
neil gardner -
NZNOG＠neilnz.com -
Simon Lyall -
Tony Wicks