Who are the current
members of ARISPA?
Fahad.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Abdulaziz
Al. Helayyil [mailto:ahelayyil@localhost]
Sent: 27 May 2006 13:47
To: Abdulla A. Hashim; Salman
Al-Mannai
Cc: Saleem
Albalooshi; Fahad AlShirawi; John Leong; ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
Anwar El Yafi; Khalid Esmaeil; Waleed Al-Qallaf; Fahad Al-hussain; Feras Bakour;
Aldubaikhi
Subject: RE:
[ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
It
is my pleasure to introduce ARISPA (Arab Regional ISPs & DSPs Association),
it is a non profit independent organization acting in the interests of
Internet & Data Communications services providers in Arab region. Arab
Peering Project (ARPP) is one of the key projects in ARISPA, the technical
committee had their first meeting in Dubai last week and we are expecting
an implementation report based on the project plan mentioned in ARPP document
attached.
Also kindly
find more information about ARISPA (the forms are under
process).
Regards,
Abdulaziz
S. Al-Helayyil
________________________
ARISPA
Assistant
Secretary General
www.arispa.org
Al
Faisaliah Group of Companies
AwalNet
Products & Marketing
Manager
E-mail :
ahelayyil@localhost
Tel. +966 (1) 460
0111 / Ext 1210
Mobile : +966 (5)
0310-0301
FAX : +966 (1) 460 0148
From: Abdulla
A. Hashim [mailto:abdulla.hashim@localhost]
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 12:51
PM
To: Salman
Al-Mannai
Cc: Saleem
Albalooshi; Fahad AlShirawi; John Leong; ncc-regional-middle-east@localhost
Anwar El Yafi; Khalid Esmaeil; Abdulaziz Al. Helayyil; Waleed Al-Qallaf; Fahad
Al-hussain; Feras Bakour
Subject: Re: [ncc-regional-middle-east]
Regional Peering
Dear All:
I believe all
of us strongly support the peering concepts between various ISPs and IXs in the
region due to many benefits that such peering can bring.
Let me also
advise you ; that the ARISPA ( Arab Regional ISPs Association ) which formally
recently formed ; is discussing such topics but on the Arab region level ; the
objective of this initiative or idea is to establish first exchange point in key
geographical areas in the arab region and then establish peering between these
regional IXs.
I might ask Abdulaziz AL Helayyil ( the secretariat of
ARISPA ) or Khalid Esmaeil ( from Etisalat and one of the peering member of
ARISPA ) to explain more about this initiative.
Also; we officially
through this email ; as a Vice President of ARISPA board ask all the ISPs to
join ARISPA ; such association is addressing all the cooperation matters
among the Arab ISPs with the objective to improve and enhance the internet
industry in the region.
Thanks and looking forward to see Qtel; Kanartel;
Batelco and others joining this Association.
Salman Al-Mannai wrote:
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.
From:
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:
>[]
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"
>To: ncc-regional-middle-east@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.
you are here: home -> Mailing Lists
