RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
-
To: "'Moeen Aqrabawi'" aqrabawi@localhost, ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
-
From: "Malik Awan" mawan@localhost
-
Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 12:04:53 +0300
-
Cc: "'Khalid Ismael'" kismael@localhost
-
Reply-to: mawan@localhost
Dear Moeen,
Thanks for this useful data. I have a question about your tracert to
Bahrain, why is the latency high at hop#8 (assuming this is direct peering)?
C:\>tracert www.batelco.com.bh
Tracing route to www.batelco.com.bh [193.188.112.74] over a maximum of 30
hops:
1 27 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1
2 38 ms 403 ms 63 ms 195.229.244.25
3 40 ms 22 ms 23 ms 195.229.244.130
4 42 ms 23 ms 23 ms 195.229.244.114
5 43 ms 22 ms 23 ms 194.170.0.142
6 42 ms 23 ms 22 ms nyc-emix-ca.at1101.emix.ae [195.229.0.253]
7 49 ms 25 ms 26 ms 195.229.31.76
8 234 ms 265 ms 233 ms 195.229.28.42
9 239 ms 239 ms 242 ms 217.17.233.220
10 * * * Request timed out.
11 256 ms 249 ms 252 ms arabic.batelco.com.bh [193.188.112.74]
Trace complete.
Regards,
Malik
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Moeen Aqrabawi [ ]
> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 1:20 AM
> To: mawan@localhost ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
> Cc: 'Khalid Ismael'
> Subject: RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
>
> Dear Malik,
>
> I hope the following info and trace-routes from my ADSL connection at home
> would help.
>
> I Cc Mr. "Khalid Ismael" SE/EMIX since his input would be very valuable on
> this.
>
> Thanks
> Moeen
> Etisalat/UAE
>
>
> ###
>
> EMIX-GCC Peering
>
> Source Remote End Bandwidth Type
International Cable
> ========= ========== ========= ====
===================
> EMIX-DXB Qatar Q-TEL 1 x DS3 Peer FOG
> EMIX-DXB Kuwait - KUIX 4 x E1 Peer FOG
> EMIX-DXB Bahrain - Batelco 5 x E1 Peer FOG
> EMIX-DXB Saudi Arabia - STC 2 x E1 Peer Saudi Cable
> [Terrestial]
> EMIX-DXB Muscat - Omantel 5 x E1 Peer FOG
> EMIX-DXB Sudan - Kanartel 1 x E1 Peer SMW3
>
> ###
>
> C:\>tracert www.omantel.co.om
>
> Tracing route to om26.omantel.net.om [212.72.23.29]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
>
> 1 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1
> 2 33 ms 22 ms 24 ms 195.229.244.25
> 3 42 ms 22 ms 37 ms 195.229.244.195
> 4 46 ms 23 ms 22 ms 195.229.244.121
> 5 39 ms 22 ms 22 ms 194.170.0.138
> 6 43 ms 23 ms 23 ms 195.229.0.241
> 7 38 ms 22 ms 22 ms 195.229.31.76
> 8 42 ms 35 ms 37 ms 195.229.28.70 <EMIX>
> 9 50 ms 33 ms 34 ms 82.178.32.22
> 10 53 ms 32 ms 34 ms 62.231.254.142
> 11 62 ms 38 ms 48 ms om26.omantel.net.om [212.72.23.29]
>
> Trace complete.
>
>
> C:\>tracert www.qtel.com.qa
>
> Tracing route to www.qtel.com.qa [212.77.204.33]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
>
> 1 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1
> 2 86 ms 40 ms 38 ms 195.229.244.25
> 3 47 ms 22 ms 22 ms 195.229.244.195
> 4 48 ms 23 ms 22 ms 195.229.244.121
> 5 42 ms 22 ms 22 ms 194.170.0.138
> 6 35 ms 23 ms 23 ms 195.229.0.241
> 7 45 ms 22 ms 23 ms 195.229.31.76
> 8 65 ms 34 ms 34 ms 195.229.28.14 <EMIX>
> 9 46 ms 34 ms 35 ms 198.32.72.30
> 10 46 ms 34 ms 35 ms 82.148.96.161
> 11 57 ms 41 ms 34 ms 82.148.96.65
> 12 55 ms 34 ms 34 ms 82.148.96.205
> 13 51 ms 34 ms 35 ms 82.148.96.137
> 14 54 ms 35 ms 35 ms 82.148.96.141
> 15 54 ms 35 ms 35 ms 212.77.222.226
> 16 61 ms 37 ms 37 ms 212.77.201.122
>
>
>
>
> C:\>tracert kt.com.kw
>
> Tracing route to kt.com.kw [195.226.228.4]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
>
> 1 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1
> 2 44 ms 36 ms 66 ms 195.229.244.25
> 3 43 ms 23 ms 23 ms 195.229.244.131
> 4 51 ms 22 ms 22 ms 195.229.244.121
> 5 63 ms 35 ms 27 ms 194.170.0.138
> 6 39 ms 22 ms 22 ms 195.229.0.241
> 7 34 ms 23 ms 45 ms dxb-emix-ra.ge6303.emix.ae [195.229.31.99]
> 8 45 ms 23 ms 22 ms 195.229.31.107
> 9 55 ms 34 ms 34 ms 195.229.29.58 <EMIX>
> 10 55 ms 35 ms 36 ms 62.150.200.2
> 11 60 ms 35 ms 40 ms ns1.qnethosting.com [195.226.228.4]
>
> Trace complete.
>
> C:\>
>
> C:\>tracert www.astra.com.sa
>
> Tracing route to www.astra.com.sa [212.12.160.12]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
>
> 1 36 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1
> 2 39 ms 22 ms 23 ms 195.229.244.25
> 3 43 ms 22 ms 23 ms 195.229.244.131
> 4 42 ms 23 ms 23 ms 195.229.244.121
> 5 44 ms 23 ms 23 ms 194.170.0.138
> 6 45 ms 28 ms 23 ms 195.229.0.241
> 7 44 ms 25 ms 26 ms 195.229.0.221 <EMIX>
> 8 261 ms 249 ms 250 ms pal5-etisalat-3-ae.pal.seabone.net
> [195.22.197
> 81]
> 9 246 ms 238 ms 235 ms pal6-pal8-racc1.pal.seabone.net
> [195.22.218.21
>
> 10 302 ms 300 ms 299 ms customer-side-saudi-telecom-kacst-1-sa-
> pal6.pa
> seabone.net [195.22.197.198]
> 11 301 ms 298 ms 308 ms vlan1.ruh-acc4.isu.net.sa [212.138.112.23]
> 12 308 ms 292 ms 291 ms nour.ruh-cust.isu.net.sa [212.26.19.54]
> 13 298 ms 315 ms 303 ms mx2.nournet.com.sa [212.12.160.12]
>
> Trace complete.
>
>
>
> C:\>tracert www.batelco.com.bh
>
> Tracing route to www.batelco.com.bh [193.188.112.74]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
>
> 1 27 ms 2 ms 2 ms 192.168.1.1
> 2 38 ms 403 ms 63 ms 195.229.244.25
> 3 40 ms 22 ms 23 ms 195.229.244.130
> 4 42 ms 23 ms 23 ms 195.229.244.114
> 5 43 ms 22 ms 23 ms 194.170.0.142
> 6 42 ms 23 ms 22 ms nyc-emix-ca.at1101.emix.ae [195.229.0.253]
> 7 49 ms 25 ms 26 ms 195.229.31.76
> 8 234 ms 265 ms 233 ms 195.229.28.42
> 9 239 ms 239 ms 242 ms 217.17.233.220
> 10 * * * Request timed out.
> 11 256 ms 249 ms 252 ms arabic.batelco.com.bh [193.188.112.74]
>
> Trace complete.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ncc-regional-middle-east-admin@localhost [mailto:ncc-regional-middle-
> east-admin@localhost] On Behalf Of Malik Awan
> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 1:16 AM
> Subject: RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
>
> After comparing the tracert from other regions, my previous tracert(s)
> showed higher than normal latency (could be caused by asymmetric routing).
> However, I have re-run the tracert from my home ADSL and the data below is
> more accurate. I have also updated the spreadsheet and added Sudan in the
> list.
>
> In summary, it shows that Qatar has established some kind of peering with
> Bahrain, Kuwait and UAE, but not with Saudi Arabia, Oman (and Sudan) etc.
> Here are summary numbers:
>
> Country Latency (ms) Router Hops in Transit AS
> ========= =========== =========================
> BAHRAIN 30 0
> KUWAIT 50 0
> UAE 27 0
> OMAN 585 14
> SAUDI ARABIA 465 6
> SUDAN 362 2
>
>
> New traceroutes start here:
>
> ==============QATAR-TO-BAHRAIN===========
>
> C:\>tracert www.banagas.com.bh
> Tracing route to www.banagas.com.bh [193.188.101.18]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
> 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
> 2 15 ms 16 ms 15 ms 213.130.127.166
> 3 18 ms 17 ms 16 ms 213.130.114.25
> 4 16 ms 16 ms 17 ms 82.148.96.186
> 5 18 ms 18 ms 18 ms 82.148.96.181
> 6 18 ms 18 ms 17 ms 82.148.96.254
> 7 24 ms 24 ms 23 ms 212.77.216.254
> 8 28 ms 24 ms 36 ms 217.17.233.69
> 9 30 ms 26 ms 28 ms 217.17.233.69
> 10 37 ms 36 ms 39 ms 193.188.104.46
> 11 35 ms 34 ms 34 ms 193.188.101.2
> 12 34 ms 57 ms 33 ms 193.188.101.18
> Trace complete.
>
> ==============QATAR-TO-KUWAIT================
>
> C:\>tracert www.kt.com.kw
> Tracing route to kt.com.kw [195.226.228.4]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
> 1 1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
> 2 15 ms 15 ms 16 ms 213.130.127.166
> 3 17 ms 16 ms 17 ms 213.130.114.25
> 4 16 ms 15 ms 16 ms 82.148.96.186
> 5 16 ms 18 ms 16 ms 82.148.96.138
> 6 18 ms 18 ms 18 ms 82.148.96.206
> 7 21 ms 16 ms 18 ms 82.148.96.66
> 8 23 ms 23 ms 20 ms 82.148.96.162
> 9 22 ms 25 ms 23 ms 198.32.72.33
> 10 29 ms 28 ms 60 ms 195.229.28.13
> 11 29 ms 28 ms 28 ms dxb-emix-ra.ge1302.emix.ae [195.229.31.67]
> 12 27 ms 29 ms 53 ms 195.229.31.107
> 13 54 ms 55 ms 55 ms 195.229.29.58
> 14 51 ms 54 ms 54 ms 62.150.200.2
> 15 52 ms 49 ms 53 ms ns1.qnethosting.com [195.226.228.4]
> Trace complete.
>
>
> ==============QATAR-TO-OMAN==================
>
> C:\>tracert omantel.net.om
> Tracing route to omantel.net.om [212.72.23.54]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
> 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
> 2 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms 213.130.127.166
> 3 20 ms 15 ms 15 ms 213.130.114.25
> 4 16 ms 15 ms 15 ms 82.148.96.186
> 5 16 ms 15 ms 16 ms 82.148.96.202
> 6 * 18 ms 17 ms 82.148.97.66
> 7 234 ms * 223 ms 12.119.94.77
> 8 236 ms 233 ms 229 ms 12.123.33.62
> 9 229 ms 233 ms 236 ms tbr1-cl1474.attga.ip.att.net
> [12.122.12.121]
> 10 239 ms 233 ms 234 ms 12.123.20.201
> 11 228 ms 230 ms 234 ms dcr1-so-4-0-0.atlanta.savvis.net
> [192.205.32.118]
> 12 239 ms 237 ms 270 ms bcs1-so-2-0-0.Washington.savvis.net
> [204.70.192.54]
> 13 240 ms 256 ms 238 ms bcs1-so-4-0-0.NewYork.savvis.net
> [204.70.192.6]
> 14 238 ms 239 ms 236 ms bcs2-so-6-0-0.NewYork.savvis.net
> [204.70.192.38]
> 15 308 ms 310 ms 312 ms bcs1-so-0-0-0.Londonlnx.savvis.net
> [204.70.192.122]
> 16 311 ms 314 ms * bcs2-as0-0.Londonlnx.savvis.net
> [204.70.193.202]
> 17 325 ms 313 ms * bcr1-so-1-0-0.Londonlnx.savvis.net
> [204.70.193.121]
> 18 305 ms 302 ms 300 ms beyond-the-network.Londonlnx.savvis.net
> [206.24.169.10]
> 19 232 ms 235 ms 229 ms ge-1.linx.londen03.uk.bb.verio.net
> [195.66.226.138]
> 20 * 230 ms 231 ms xe-0-2-0.r22.londen03.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net
> [129.250.2.65]
> 21 227 ms 230 ms 230 ms ge-
> 0.flagtelecom.londen03.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net
> [129.250.10.202]
> 22 302 ms 304 ms 304 ms so-2-1-0.0.cjr01.nyc007.flagtel.com
> [62.216.128.233]
> 23 312 ms 303 ms 302 ms so-3-0-0.0.cjr01.nyc005.flagtel.com
> [62.216.128.50]
> 24 369 ms 370 ms 373 ms so-2-1-0.0.cjr02.lax001.flagtel.com
> [62.216.128.241]
> 25 586 ms 582 ms * 80.77.0.42
> 26 582 ms 585 ms 576 ms 82.178.32.21
> 27 585 ms 584 ms 584 ms 62.231.254.130
> 28 585 ms 585 ms 584 ms webhost.omantel.net.om [212.72.23.54]
> Trace complete.
>
>
> ==============QATAR-TO-SAUDI ARABIA===========
>
> C:\>tracert www.astra.com.sa
> Tracing route to www.astra.com.sa [212.12.160.12]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
> 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
> 2 16 ms 15 ms 15 ms 213.130.127.166
> 3 17 ms 15 ms 16 ms 213.130.114.25
> 4 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms 82.148.96.186
> 5 17 ms 17 ms 15 ms 82.148.96.202
> 6 17 ms 16 ms 19 ms 82.148.97.66
> 7 20 ms 17 ms 18 ms 212.77.200.169
> 8 248 ms 249 ms 248 ms r42-doha.netw.qatar.net.qa [212.77.201.42]
> 9 236 ms 241 ms 238 ms softbank219058126017.bbtec.net
> [219.58.126.17]
> 10 275 ms 323 ms 259 ms if-6-0.mcore4.NJY-Newark.teleglobe.net
> [216.6.63.33]
> 11 403 ms 408 ms 409 ms ix-3-0.core1.NJY-Newark.Teleglobe.net
> [64.86.84.178]
> 12 528 ms 531 ms 536 ms pal6-pal7-racc1.pal.seabone.net
> [195.22.218.209]
> 13 435 ms 442 ms 433 ms
> customer-side-saudi-telecom-kacst-1-sa-pal6.pal.seabone.net
> [195.22.197.198]
> 14 599 ms 453 ms 481 ms vlan1.ruh-acc4.isu.net.sa [212.138.112.23]
> 15 447 ms 449 ms 445 ms nour.ruh-cust.isu.net.sa [212.26.19.54]
> 16 445 ms 451 ms 448 ms mx2.nour.net.sa [212.12.160.12]
> Trace complete.
>
>
> ==============QATAR-TO-SUDAN===========
>
> C:\>tracert www.canar.sd
> Tracing route to canar.sd [196.29.160.164]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
> 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
> 2 15 ms 16 ms 15 ms 213.130.127.166
> 3 17 ms 16 ms 16 ms 213.130.114.25
> 4 17 ms 15 ms 16 ms 82.148.96.186
> 5 16 ms 15 ms 16 ms 82.148.96.138
> 6 18 ms 16 ms 15 ms 82.148.96.206
> 7 18 ms 15 ms 17 ms 82.148.96.66
> 8 162 ms 164 ms 163 ms 62.216.146.201
> 9 365 ms 366 ms 366 ms 80.77.1.174
> 10 367 ms 366 ms 364 ms 196.29.160.22
> 11 364 ms 362 ms 365 ms 196.29.160.164
> Trace complete.
>
>
> ==============QATAR-TO-UAE==================
>
> C:\>tracert www.etisalat.ae
> Tracing route to www.etisalat.ae [213.42.25.85]
> over a maximum of 30 hops:
> 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 192.168.0.1
> 2 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms 213.130.127.166
> 3 15 ms 16 ms 15 ms 213.130.114.25
> 4 16 ms 15 ms 15 ms 82.148.96.186
> 5 16 ms 15 ms 16 ms 82.148.96.138
> 6 18 ms 19 ms 16 ms 82.148.96.206
> 7 18 ms 17 ms 21 ms 82.148.96.66
> 8 16 ms 17 ms 16 ms 82.148.96.162
> 9 17 ms 20 ms 17 ms 198.32.72.33
> 10 35 ms 33 ms 72 ms 195.229.28.13
> 11 32 ms 29 ms 28 ms dxb-emix-rb.ge130.emix.ae [195.229.31.66]
> 12 28 ms 27 ms 29 ms 195.229.0.90
> 13 36 ms 35 ms 33 ms 213.42.0.51
> 14 28 ms 30 ms 29 ms 28 ms 213.42.25.85
> Trace complete.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Malik
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ncc-regional-middle-east-admin@localhost [mailto:ncc-regional-
> middle-
> > east-admin@localhost] On Behalf Of Saleem Albalooshi
> > Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 12:20 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
> >
> > Wa Alikum Al Salam,
> > Dear Malik,
> > Excellent initiative.
> >
> > Please find below the tracert results from CANAR (www.canar.sd) which is
> > a new telecom operator in SUDAN, services provided includes voice and
> > data services. since CANAR only have peering with EMIX the latency is
> > around 80 ms, with all other ISP's in the gulf region CANAR traffic is
> > routed via UK their the latency varies between 300ms up to 600 ms.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > -------------
> > C:\Documents and Settings\>tracert www.etisalat.ae
> >
> > Tracing route to www.etisalat.ae [213.42.25.85]
> > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> >
> > 1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.60.1
> > 2 15 ms 4 ms 4 ms 196.29.174.1
> > 3 15 ms 5 ms 4 ms 196.29.160.34
> > 4 15 ms 3 ms 4 ms 196.29.160.21
> > 5 91 ms 79 ms 79 ms 195.229.28.49
> > 6 75 ms 79 ms 79 ms dxb-emix-rb.ge130.emix.ae [195.229.31.66]
> > 7 96 ms 77 ms 79 ms 195.229.0.90
> > 8 81 ms 79 ms 79 ms 213.42.0.35
> > 9 80 ms 79 ms 79 ms 213.42.25.85
> >
> > Trace complete.
> >
> > C:\Documents and Settings\>tracert www.mobily.com.sa
> >
> > Tracing route to www.mobily.com.sa [84.23.96.28]
> > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> >
> > 1 1 ms 3 ms 1 ms 192.168.60.1
> > 2 15 ms 4 ms 4 ms 196.29.174.1
> > 3 16 ms 5 ms 4 ms 196.29.160.18
> > 4 231 ms 204 ms 204 ms 80.77.1.173
> > 5 217 ms 205 ms 204 ms so-2-1-0.0.cjr01.ldn004.flagtel.com
> [62.216.129.50]
> > 6 227 ms 296 ms 204 ms 62.216.147.22
> > 7 227 ms 213 ms 297 ms pos6-0.2488M.asd9nxg1.ip.tele.dk [83.88.21.65]
> > 8 319 ms 308 ms 305 ms ams7.ams.seabone.net [195.215.109.78]
> > 9 328 ms 306 ms 307 ms pal6-pal8-racc1.pal.seabone.net [195.22.218.211]
> > 10 331 ms 407 ms 409 ms
> > customer-side-saudi-telecom-kacst-1-sa-pal6.pal.seabone.net
> > [195.22.197.198]
> > 11 342 ms 400 ms 330 ms vlan1.ruh-acc1.isu.net.sa [212.138.112.4]
> > 12 * * * Request timed out.
> > 13 458 ms * 459 ms 212.71.32.7
> > 14 * * * Request timed out.
> > 15 * ^C
> >
> > C:\Documents and Settings\>tracert www.qtel.com.qa
> >
> > Tracing route to www.qtel.com.qa [212.77.204.33]
> > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> >
> > 1 2 ms 1 ms 2 ms 192.168.60.1
> > 2 16 ms 4 ms 5 ms 196.29.174.1
> > 3 17 ms 5 ms 4 ms 196.29.160.34
> > 4 222 ms 205 ms 206 ms 80.77.1.173
> > 5 431 ms 409 ms 412 ms 62.216.146.202
> > 6 429 ms 409 ms 408 ms 82.148.96.65
> > 7 431 ms 409 ms 409 ms 82.148.96.205
> > 8 431 ms 409 ms 409 ms 82.148.96.137
> > 9 429 ms 364 ms 453 ms 82.148.96.141
> > 10 375 ms 407 ms 409 ms 212.77.222.226
> > 11 431 ms 409 ms 409 ms 212.77.201.122
> > 12 * * * Request timed out.
> > 13 * ^C
> >
> > C:\Documents and Settings\>tracert www.batelco.bh
> >
> > Tracing route to www.batelco.bh [193.188.112.40]
> > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> >
> > 1 1 ms 2 ms 7 ms 192.168.60.1
> > 2 16 ms 4 ms 3 ms 196.29.174.1
> > 3 21 ms 4 ms 4 ms 196.29.160.18
> > 4 219 ms 204 ms 204 ms 80.77.1.173
> > 5 224 ms 306 ms 205 ms so-3-3-0.0.cjr01.ldn004.flagtel.com
> > [62.216.129.146]
> > 6 228 ms 205 ms 204 ms ge-1-1-2.r22.londen03.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net
> > [129.250.10.201]
> > 7 226 ms 204 ms 204 ms linx1.teleglobe.net [195.66.224.51]
> > 8 226 ms 204 ms 204 ms if-7-0.core1.LHX-London.teleglobe.net
> > [195.219.15.214]
> > 9 226 ms 205 ms 204 ms if-5-0.core2.LHX-London.teleglobe.net
> > [195.219.15.218]
> > 10 227 ms 204 ms 198 ms if-5-1.bb1.RSD-Riyad.teleglobe.net
> [195.219.13.18]
> > 11 425 ms 409 ms 409 ms ix-3-2.bb1.RSD-Riyad.teleglobe.net
> [66.198.126.2]
> > 12 431 ms 409 ms 409 ms 217.17.233.204
> > 13 * * * Request timed out.
> > 14 367 ms 409 ms 409 ms cblt3.batelco.com.bh [193.188.112.40]
> >
> > Trace complete.
> >
> > C:\Documents and Settings\>tracert www.kuwait.kw
> >
> > Tracing route to kuwait.kw [62.150.113.4]
> > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> >
> > 1 1 ms 1 ms 2 ms 192.168.60.1
> > 2 15 ms 3 ms 4 ms 196.29.174.1
> > 3 16 ms 4 ms 3 ms 196.29.160.18
> > 4 213 ms 204 ms 204 ms 80.77.1.173
> > 5 226 ms 204 ms 204 ms so-2-1-0.0.cjr01.ldn004.flagtel.com
> [62.216.129.50]
> > 6 247 ms 205 ms 206 ms ge-1-1-2.r22.londen03.uk.bb.gin.ntt.net
> > [129.250.10.201]
> > 7 225 ms 203 ms 204 ms linx1.teleglobe.net [195.66.224.51]
> > 8 227 ms 205 ms 203 ms if-4-0.core2.LDN-London.Teleglobe.net
> > [195.219.96.70]
> > 9 225 ms 204 ms 205 ms if-1-0.core2.LHX-London.Teleglobe.net
> > [195.219.96.122]
> > 10 228 ms 204 ms 205 ms if-5-1.bb1.RSD-Riyad.teleglobe.net
> [195.219.13.18]
> > 11 226 ms 203 ms 205 ms ix-9-4.bb1.RSD-Riyad.teleglobe.net
> [66.198.126.46]
> > 12 227 ms 205 ms 203 ms 62.150.200.2
> > 13 225 ms 204 ms 205 ms isp.qualitynet.net [195.226.227.10]
> > 14 227 ms 204 ms 203 ms 192.168.0.178
> > 15 * * * Request timed out.
> > 16 ^C
> >
> > C:\Documents and Settings\>tracert www.oman.om
> >
> > Tracing route to om22.omantel.net.om [212.72.23.44]
> > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> >
> > 1 2 ms 2 ms 1 ms 192.168.60.1
> > 2 15 ms 4 ms 4 ms 196.29.174.1
> > 3 15 ms 5 ms 5 ms 196.29.160.18
> > 4 222 ms 205 ms 204 ms 80.77.1.173
> > 5 226 ms 206 ms 204 ms so-2-1-0.0.cjr01.ldn004.flagtel.com
> [62.216.129.50]
> > 6 326 ms 307 ms 306 ms so-2-1-0.0.cjr01.nyc007.flagtel.com
> > [62.216.128.233]
> > 7 325 ms 306 ms 307 ms so-3-0-0.0.cjr01.nyc005.flagtel.com
> [62.216.128.50]
> > 8 431 ms 409 ms 409 ms so-2-1-0.0.cjr02.lax001.flagtel.com
> > [62.216.128.241]
> > 9 636 ms 619 ms 711 ms 80.77.0.42
> > 10 634 ms 620 ms 618 ms 82.178.32.22
> > 11 641 ms 619 ms 711 ms 62.231.254.142
> > 12 631 ms 619 ms 712 ms om22.omantel.net.om [212.72.23.44]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Malik Awan wrote:
> >
> > > Assalaom Alekum to all,
> > >
> > > Good discussion, and nice to see many perspectives on regional
> > > peering. Does anyone have a map of existing IP connectivity in the GCC
> > > region (showing all Peering/ Transit arrangements) along with the
> > > latency, Router hops and AS-Path counts for traffic within GCC
> > > providers? Also, how much traffic gets exchanged among the GCC
> > > providers? Such data would be very useful to make a business case and
> > > show the value proposition. Please see attached excel spreadsheet for
> > > a matrix template.
> > >
> > > Below are some traceroutes to few destinations in the GCC countries.
> > > This gives some indication of how traffic is routing from Qatar to
> > > others in the region, others are welcome to share their traceroutes.
> > >
> > > To keep the traces short, I have trimmed first four hops, as those are
> > > internal and less relevant.
> > >
> > > ==============QATAR-TO-UAE==================
> > >
> > > C:\>tracert www.etisalat.co.ae
> > >
> > > Tracing route to www.etisalat.ae [213.42.25.85]
> > >
> > > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> > >
> > > 5 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.206
> > >
> > > 6 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.66
> > >
> > > 7 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.162
> > >
> > > 8 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 198.32.72.33
> > >
> > > 9 339 ms 340 ms 340 ms 195.229.28.13
> > >
> > > 10 356 ms 356 ms 360 ms dxb-emix-rb.ge130.emix.ae [195.229.31.66]
> > >
> > > 11 358 ms 353 ms 365 ms 195.229.0.90
> > >
> > > 12 340 ms 345 ms 345 ms 213.42.0.51
> > >
> > > 13 339 ms 333 ms 357 ms 213.42.25.85
> > >
> > > Trace complete.
> > >
> > > ==============QATAR-TO-KUWAIT================
> > >
> > > c:\>tracert www.kt.com.kw
> > >
> > > Tracing route to kt.com.kw [195.226.228.4]
> > >
> > > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> > >
> > > 5 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.206
> > >
> > > 6 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.66
> > >
> > > 7 1 ms 2 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.162
> > >
> > > 8 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 198.32.72.33
> > >
> > > 9 339 ms 339 ms 339 ms 195.229.28.13
> > >
> > > 10 371 ms 356 ms 356 ms dxb-emix-ra.ge1302.emix.ae [195.229.31.67]
> > >
> > > 11 333 ms 362 ms 358 ms 195.229.31.107
> > >
> > > 12 223 ms 223 ms 223 ms 195.229.29.58
> > >
> > > 13 225 ms 225 ms 227 ms 62.150.200.2
> > >
> > > 14 228 ms 227 ms 227 ms ns1.qnethosting.com [195.226.228.4]
> > >
> > > Trace complete.
> > >
> > > ==============QATAR-TO-OMAN==================
> > >
> > > C:\>tracert omantel.net.om
> > >
> > > Tracing route to omantel.net.om [212.72.23.54]
> > >
> > > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> > >
> > > 5 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.137
> > >
> > > 6 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.202
> > >
> > > 7 63 ms 3 ms 1 ms 82.148.97.66
> > >
> > > 8 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 212.77.200.169
> > >
> > > 9 231 ms 231 ms 259 ms r42-doha.netw.qatar.net.qa [212.77.201.42]
> > >
> > > 10 234 ms 231 ms 233 ms softbank219058126017.bbtec.net [219.58.126.17]
> > >
> > > 11 232 ms 231 ms 233 ms if-9-0.mcore3.NJY-Newark.teleglobe.net
> > > [216.6.57.45]
> > >
> > > 12 231 ms 238 ms 232 ms if-1-0.core1.NJY-Newark.teleglobe.net
> > [216.6.57.2]
> > >
> > > 13 * 233 ms 232 ms if-0-0-0.bb2.NJY-Newark.teleglobe.net
> [207.45.221.37]
> > >
> > > 14 232 ms 232 ms 232 ms ix-4-0-0.bb2.NJY-Newark.Teleglobe.net
> > > [64.86.230.26]
> > >
> > > 15 447 ms 445 ms 446 ms 82.178.32.153
> > >
> > > 16 447 ms 445 ms 446 ms 82.178.32.85
> > >
> > > 17 446 ms 445 ms 447 ms 62.231.254.162
> > >
> > > 18 460 ms 447 ms 445 ms webhost.omantel.net.om [212.72.23.54]
> > >
> > > Trace complete.
> > >
> > > ==============QATAR-TO-SAUDI ARABIA===========
> > >
> > > C:\>tracert www.astra.com.sa
> > >
> > > Tracing route to www.astra.com.sa [212.12.160.12]
> > >
> > > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> > >
> > > 5 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.137
> > >
> > > 6 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.202
> > >
> > > 7 3 ms 3 ms 5 ms 82.148.97.66
> > >
> > > 8 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 212.77.200.169
> > >
> > > 9 232 ms 232 ms 232 ms r42-doha.netw.qatar.net.qa [212.77.201.42]
> > >
> > > 10 231 ms 259 ms 232 ms softbank219058126017.bbtec.net [219.58.126.17]
> > >
> > > 11 * 244 ms 232 ms if-6-0.mcore4.NJY-Newark.teleglobe.net
> [216.6.63.33]
> > >
> > > 12 233 ms 232 ms 233 ms ix-3-0.core1.NJY-Newark.Teleglobe.net
> > > [64.86.84.178]
> > >
> > > 13 349 ms 349 ms 348 ms pal6-pal8-racc1.pal.seabone.net
> [195.22.218.211]
> > >
> > > 14 911 ms 935 ms 1002 ms
> > > customer-side-saudi-telecom-kacst-1-sa-pal6.pal.seabone.net
> > > [195.22.197.198]
> > >
> > > 15 896 ms 907 ms 904 ms vlan1.ruh-acc4.isu.net.sa [212.138.112.23]
> > >
> > > 16 * 901 ms 910 ms nour.ruh-cust.isu.net.sa [212.26.19.54]
> > >
> > > 17 904 ms 904 ms 908 ms mx2.nournet.com.sa [212.12.160.12]
> > >
> > > Trace complete.
> > >
> > > ==============QATAR-TO-BAHRAIN===========
> > >
> > > C:\>tracert www.banagas.com.bh
> > >
> > > Tracing route to www.banagas.com.bh [193.188.101.18]
> > >
> > > over a maximum of 30 hops:
> > >
> > > 5 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.137
> > >
> > > 6 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms 82.148.96.181
> > >
> > > 7 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 82.148.96.254
> > >
> > > 8 218 ms 220 ms 221 ms 212.77.216.254
> > >
> > > 9 215 ms 224 ms 221 ms 217.17.233.69
> > >
> > > 10 221 ms 250 ms 215 ms 217.17.233.69
> > >
> > > 11 732 ms 670 ms 682 ms 193.188.104.46
> > >
> > > 12 691 ms 773 ms 666 ms 193.188.101.2
> > >
> > > 13 586 ms 585 ms 547 ms 193.188.101.18
> > >
> > > Trace complete.
> > >
> > > =====================================================
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Malik Awan
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > >
> > > *From:* ncc-regional-middle-east-admin@localhost
> > > [] *On Behalf Of *Salman
> > > Al-Mannai
> > > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 24, 2006 1:01 PM
> > > *To:* Fahad AlShirawi; Saleem Albalooshi
> > > *Cc:* John Leong; ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
> > > *Subject:* RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
> > >
> > > Furthermore,
> > >
> > > John has illustrated an extreme case of the little intra traffic, that
> > > may not prove the economy of the peering, I think the reason is:
> > >
> > > 1. most of the Web sites are hosted in the use (99% of them !), why?
> > > simply because, web hosting is offered much cheaper, abandons of
> > > bandwidth, etc. my focus here is on the abandons of bandwidth.
> > >
> > > 2. there is no simple mean by which we can identify the traffic
> > > whither it is destined to a neighbor or outside - without a detailed
> > > analysis, so we are not in a position to tell how much traffic we are
> > > exchange among each other.
> > >
> > > 3. Key contents providers are hosting their contents in places
> > > outside, mainly for political reasons, but many for technical reasons,
> > > I'm sure if that technical limitation is lifted, we might see at least
> > > 50% of contents providers coming back home.
> > >
> > > -- let us have the chicken that lays the eggs (make'em gold please).
> > >
> > > regards
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > >
> > > *From:* ncc-regional-middle-east-admin@localhost on behalf of Salman
> > > Al-Mannai
> > > *Sent:* Wed 5/24/2006 12:44 PM
> > > *To:* Fahad AlShirawi; Saleem Albalooshi
> > > *Cc:* John Leong; ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
> > > *Subject:* RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
> > >
> > > Thanks Fahad,
> > >
> > > I feel we need to physically get together and have real serious
> > > discussions on how to go forward.
> > >
> > > The issue pertaining to 'tracert': my analogy is that the traffic may
> > > not flow through the shortest route, rather the optimum, this is one,
> > > two, I don't find 2 MB between UAE and Bahrain, or any two countries
> > > for that matter, is something good to celebrate for, this is the
> > > bandwidth I have at home. I sometimes find the reports produced by
> > > MRTG are missleading , the bottem line, FOG is already in place, and I
> > > can confidently say, it is accoumilating 'age' ea. wasted bandwidth.
> > >
> > > We have so far, managed to peer with UAE (Qtel <-> Etisalat) over DS3
> > > (45 Mbs) - I still find it too little, perhaps we upgrade to STM-1, or
> > > even STM-4 if someone can initiate more applications (such as e-gov,
> > > e-trade with businesses in both countries, media stuff, etc.), Abdulla
> > > Hashem from eCompany and myslef have tried to initiate the same with
> > > BIX, that has not completed yet!.
> > >
> > > The idea is let us just have that thick pipe among GCC in place, and
> > > we let the business to realize its potential and start filling it up,
> > > I'm sure there are many marketing guys out there who will find it a
> > > business opportunity and will probably come back to us for more.
> > >
> > > regards
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > >
> > > *From:* Fahad AlShirawi []
> > > *Sent:* Wed 5/24/2006 12:30 PM
> > > *To:* Salman Al-Mannai; 'Saleem Albalooshi'
> > > *Cc:* 'John Leong'; ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
> > > *Subject:* RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
> > >
> > > Salman,
> > >
> > > We have indeed discussed those contents and this approach. I think I
> > > agree with you and your proposal more than any other. It is the best
> > > setup overall and allows for significant diversity in the connectivity
> > > and the peering arrangements.
> > >
> > > Saleem,
> > >
> > > The issue is not if there exists a peering link. Yes, it is there.
> > > However, as I sit here in Bahrain and tracert a site in the UAE, I
> > > still go via the US. I don't think this is because the setup is not
> > > right. I think it is simply because a 2Mbps peering link cannot handle
> > > the volume of traffic that needs to flow in between our countries.
> > >
> > > Of course, I have no statistics on usage of those links and I don't
> > > put the full blame on the bandwidth, but I do think we need to do
> > > something about it. I'm seconding Salman's proposal and saying we
> > > don't need to wait for a GCC telecom committee to get together to do
> > > this. Especially since not everyone involved is a member of such a
> > > committee.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Fahad.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > *From:* Salman Al-Mannai []
> > > *Sent:* 24 May 2006 11:10
> > > *To:* Saleem Albalooshi; Fahad AlShirawi
> > > *Cc:* John Leong; ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
> > > *Subject:* RE: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
> > >
> > > Dear Saleem and Fahad,
> > >
> > > I do understand Fahad's concenrs, that is why I'm for the IX-IX
> > > peering appraoch in the GCC, this matter has been pursued by Saleem
> > > and Mr. Aabdulla Hashem. however, we still need some political levrage
> > > in order to proceed (ea. to be put on the agenda of one of the GCC
> > > telecom committees, and then to be enforced by the respective
> > regulator).
> > >
> > > second, the idea of pursuing a NAP/NSP, this is purely a commercial
> > > descission that is typically assessed from financial feasiblity
> > > perspective, while peering will make sense for the obvious reasons
> > > that have been mentioned in several ocasions.
> > >
> > > I also don't find it proper to establish one common place for peer-ers
> > > to exchange traffic (ea. GCC IXP) while it may save on linking costs,
> > > it may also become an operational burden on the host, and may again
> > > add to the cost. my suggestion is to have adjacent peering among
> > > niebourghing operators (ex.
> > > Oman<->UAE<->Qatar<->Bahrain<->Kuwait<->Saudi Arabia<->Oman - back)
> > >
> > > I don't meen to set you back by mentioning the above, I just wanted to
> > > illusterate situation, I've already passed a presentation (which was
> > > done in part by Saleem, he has already given references to his past
> > > work on this) which I don't mind sharing with you, if Saleem does not
> > > mind.
> > >
> > > NB: Fahad, we have already discussed the contents of the presentation
> > > in January.
> > >
> > > regards
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > >
> > > *From:* ncc-regional-middle-east-admin@localhost on behalf of Saleem
> > > Albalooshi
> > > *Sent:* Wed 5/24/2006 12:58 AM
> > > *To:* Fahad AlShirawi
> > > *Cc:* 'John Leong'; ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
> > > *Subject:* Re: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
> > >
> > > Dear Fahad,
> > > Thank you very much for your valuable participation.
> > >
> > > The good new is that all the main ISP's in the GCC countries are
> already
> > > interconnected since 2004.
> > >
> > > Below are some documents that may help in understanding the peering
> > > status between the GCC countries.
> > >
> > > http://www.gcc-itrc.ae/en/Meetings/first/Presentations.html
> > > http://www.gcc-itrc.ae/wgs/ae_kw.html
> > > http://www.gcc-itrc.ae/Files/gcc_peering_update.ppt
> > >
> > > What I now is that Etisalat has built an excellent peering
> connectivity
> > > with most of the countries in the region, for example:
> > > 1. All GCC countries (Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman)
> > > 2. India
> > > 3. Singapore
> > > 4. Malaysia
> > > 5. Cypris
> > > 6. Taiwan
> > > 7. Japan
> > > 8. Hong Kong
> > > 9. Sudan
> > > Also with some international Exchange points i.e LINEX and NYIIX.
> > >
> > > and Much more,
> > > Mr. Moeen Aqrabawi, could you please help in updating us on the status
> > > of the Peering connectivity from the UAE.
> > >
> > > We need to here from other members in this list on the peering
> > > connectivity from their countries.
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > Saleem
> > > UAEnic
> > >
> > > Fahad AlShirawi wrote:
> > >
> > >>My first contribution to this mailing list:
> > >>
> > >>John,
> > >>
> > >>While I definitely agree with your assessment, there are issues in the
> > >>GCC that sadly make peering a dream we are all waiting for but are
> very
> > >>unlikely to realize any time soon. On one hand, the PTTs are all
> looking
> > >>to peer with each other, while at the same time are wary of each
> other.
> > >>The only two countries I know off that have appropriate direct peering
> > >>are the Emarites and Qatar. Even that is only something I heard and I
> am
> > >>not actually sure off. In any case, when a new player indicates
> interest
> > >>in a peering arrangement, the propose IP Transit. It's the mentality
> of:
> > >>We are big and you are small, why do you need peering? Just take IP
> > >>Transit from us.
> > >>
> > >>On the other hand, bandwidth to the US, once you hit a landing point,
> is
> > >>a lot cheaper than bandwidth controlled by monopolies in the GCC.
> There
> > >>are no IRUs currently between GCC countries and the first cable system
> > >>of its kind that will allow someone other than the monopolies to own
> > >>capacity is... Well, Falcon, but god knows when Falcon will be
> complete.
> > >>It's over a year late now. Additionally, in some countries, because
> FLAG
> > >>partnered with the PTTs there, they will not sell capacity directly to
> a
> > >>competitor of the PTT but will leave it up to the PTT to control.
> Their
> > >>argument, said in private, is that they can't anger their partners by
> > >>selling to a competitor of theirs. Publicly, their position is this:
> You
> > >>don't need the capacity. We are trying to help you. Don't take it.
> > >>
> > >>When you insist you do, you are ignored.
> > >>
> > >>As to the NAP issue, there are people working on building one and then
> > >>attempting to attract the business. I know Mr. Ahmad AlHujairi who I
> > >>believe is a member of this list is doing just that with Gulf Gateway
> > >>Internet. I wish them all the luck and success. I would like to see
> this
> > >>happen and I would like to see peering become a reality. Still, I
> think
> > >>they are a long way away from that kind of success.
> > >>
> > >>In any case, so far, I feel that STC in Saudi is the most open to
> > >>negotiations and discussion.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Regards,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Fahad.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: ncc-regional-middle-east-admin@localhost
> > >>[] On Behalf Of John
> Leong
> > >>Sent: 22 May 2006 11:58
> > >>To: Saleem Albalooshi; ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
> > >>Subject: Re: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>Sorry for the late response. Yes, it is totally inefficient (and
> > >>strange)
> > >>to have traffic between the GCC countries to go through the US.
> > >>
> > >>Not only will it add latency you are also unecessary using up some
> very
> > >>expensive long haul bandwidth. BTW: On latency, while the longer round
> > >>
> > >>trip propagation delay is clearly a factor, the real pain is
> additional
> > >>router hops. Routers are real nasty since besides queueing delay, they
> > >>are
> > >>congestion points. The impact of packet loss [on TCP] is orders of
> > >>magnitude more than any propagation delay, since you will have to pay
> > >>the
> > >>direct penality of time out [to discover you have lost a packet] as
> well
> > >>as
> > >>suffer longer term side effect of having you transmission window
> > >>reduced.
> > >>
> > >>In any event, you should peer with each other within the GCC. From
> > >>engineering point of view, NAP makes a lot of sense. However,
> > >>practically,
> > >>most of the ISPs do bi-lateral rather than multilateral peering at a
> > >>single
> > >>location so the NAP's role is somewhat diminished.
> > >>
> > >>Best regards,
> > >>John
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>----- Original Message -----
> > >>From: "Saleem Albalooshi" saleem@localhost
> > >>
> > >>Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 2:26 AM
> > >>Subject: [ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Dear All,
> > >>>Kindly find below a writeup about the importance of establishing
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>peering
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>connectivity between the regional ISP's, please feel free to correct
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>or
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>comment on any technical or linguistic information in the writeup
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>below.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>Saleem Al-Balooshi
> > >>>UAEnic
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> > >>-----------------
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >******************************************************************
> > >
> > >The information in this email and any attachments thereto, may
> > >
> > >contain information that is confidential, protected by
> > >
> > >intellectual property rights, and may be legally privileged. It
> > >
> > >is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to this email by
> > >
> > >anyone else is unauthorized. Any use, disclosure, copying, or
> > >
> > >distribution of the information contained herein by persons other
> > >
> > >than the designated addressee is unauthorized and may be
> > >
> > >unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, you should
> > >
> > >delete this message immediately from your system. If you believe
> > >
> > >that you have received this email in error, please contact the
> > >
> > >sender or ictQATAR at + 974 (4) 935 922.
> > >
> > >Any views expressed in this email or its attachments are those of
> > >
> > >the individual sender except where the sender, expressly and with
> > >
> > >authority, states them to be the views of ictQATAR.
> > >
> > >******************************************************************
> > >
> > >The information in this email and any attachments thereto, may
> > >
> > >contain information that is confidential, protected by
> > >
> > >intellectual property rights, and may be legally privileged. It
> > >
> > >is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to this email by
> > >
> > >anyone else is unauthorized. Any use, disclosure, copying, or
> > >
> > >distribution of the information contained herein by persons other
> > >
> > >than the designated addressee is unauthorized and may be
> > >
> > >unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, you should
> > >
> > >delete this message immediately from your system. If you believe
> > >
> > >that you have received this email in error, please contact the
> > >
> > >sender or ictQATAR at + 974 (4) 935 922.
> > >
> > >Any views expressed in this email or its attachments are those of
> > >
> > >the individual sender except where the sender, expressly and with
> > >
> > >authority, states them to be the views of ictQATAR.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >******************************************************************
> > >
> > >The information in this email and any attachments thereto, may
> > >
> > >contain information that is confidential, protected by
> > >
> > >intellectual property rights, and may be legally privileged. It
> > >
> > >is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to this email by
> > >
> > >anyone else is unauthorized. Any use, disclosure, copying, or
> > >
> > >distribution of the information contained herein by persons other
> > >
> > >than the designated addressee is unauthorized and may be
> > >
> > >unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, you should
> > >
> > >delete this message immediately from your system. If you believe
> > >
> > >that you have received this email in error, please contact the
> > >
> > >sender or ictQATAR at + 974 (4) 935 922.
> > >
> > >Any views expressed in this email or its attachments are those of
> > >
> > >the individual sender except where the sender, expressly and with
> > >
> > >authority, states them to be the views of ictQATAR.
> > >
> >
>
>
|
you are here: home -> Mailing Lists
