Re: Exchange updates

  • To: nanog at merit dot edu
  • Subject: Re: Exchange updates
  • From: Michael Dillon <michael at memra dot com>
  • Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 18:54:18 -0800 (PST)
  • Cc: eof-list at ripe dot net, apops at apnic dot net, sghuter at nsrc dot org, aloysio at nic.embratel dot net dot br
  • In-reply-to: <3.0.32.19970204185436.006b8240 at lint dot cisco dot com>
  • Organization: Memra Software Inc. - Internet consulting
  • Reply-to: Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com>
  • Sender: owner-apops@apnic.net
    • On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Paul Ferguson wrote:
      
      > It would *great* if an English version of this page existed.  :-/
      
      How about a summary?
      
      > >		Embratel - PIR
      
      1. Introduction - introduces definitions such as
                        PBI = NSP like Sprint, MCI, et al.
                        PSCI = ISP like Panix, Netaxs, et al.
                        RAR = academic nets like Merit
                        AUT = ISP's who bypass the national backbone. These
                              do not exist in the USA but do in Canada and
                              some other countries
                        IR = Network Interconnection
                        PIR = NAP or IXP
                        Embratel = the national telco
                        RNP = Brazil's version of NSFnet
                        GT-ER = WG on Network Engineering and Operation
                                sounds a bit like an formal NANOG.
      
      In this scenario there's a growing need for a completely integrated
      national Internet architecture in Brazil. The IR WG is defining the
      archtecture and establishing the criteria for later implementation of
      this. This document is based upon the American NAP experiences with the
      intention of adapting it to the reality in Brazil.
      
      2. IXP's - defines and IXP and points out that the IXP will not supply
                 international transit, that's the job of the PBI's. Points out 
                 that everyone (PBI, AUT and RAR) must connect to the PIR's in 
                 order to keep all local traffic off international links. PIR's
                 can be implemented with Ethernet, Fast Ether, FDDI, SMDS, ATM.
                 Minimum requirements are T1 line and BGP capability. No AUP's
                 allowed regarding traffic content.
      
      3. Topics for discussion about IXP's.
         Various questions arise...
         Where will the PIR's be located?
         Who can connect directly to a PIR?
         What will be the minimum conditions for a network to connect to a PIR?
         What is the minimum physical structure of a PIR?
         What will be the minimum operational ?procedures (?installation,
         emergency situations PIR-PIR communication, PIR-network communication)?
         What will be the minimum security ?procedures imposed by a PIR?
         What will be the ? usage policy for information traffic in a PIR?
         What will be the ?procedures for collecting and processing statistical
         data on the traffic.
         Who can start and operate a PIR?
         How will PIR services be priced? Will they be fee-based?
      
      [note: where a word begins with ? it means I'm not sure of the translation]
      
      4. Initial Proposition
      
         Who can connect...?  To get local traffic off the international links
                              all networks with an existing international 
                              ?should?must connect and must direct all local
                              traffic to the PIR's.
      
         Where will they be?  Where the major traffic volumes are. In the two
                              principal cities São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. For
                              strategic reasons a PIR will also go in the
                              capital city, Brasilia. As traffic levels evolve
                              Belo Horizonte, Porto Alegre, Curitiba, etc.
      
         Minimum conditions to connect? First, a PIR can be built with Fast
                                        Ethernet or FDDI. Connections to the PIR
                                        will be minimum of 512kbps. Fast Ether
                                        is cheap, FDDI more robust but complex.
         [this last sentence            In the future  new technologies will be 
          is a full direct              examined such as ATM, for example,
          translation of the original]  following the tendency of the NAP's.
      
         Operational procedures? Hoped for service levels: 7/24 operation
                                 and ?accessibility. 99.5% uptime, 2 hour
                                 recovery time from critical problems.
      
         Minimum security? Participants will be responsible for security
                           of their own networks. No specific mechanisms to
                           be imposed by the PIR.
      
         Who can run one? Any company who has the knowledge to run one. Right
                          now Embratel and RNP are the most likely, each one
                          being responsible for one PIR; one in SP and one in RdJ
      
         Pricing?  PIR services must be offered commercially for a monthly fee.
                   Circuits must be bought from the local telco.
      
      5. Conclusion    As was mentioned previously, this is a first draft
                       regarding IR whith the objective of giving a basic
                       outline for debate. As suggestions and criticisms
                       are received, this text will be expanded possibly
                       leading to a recommendation that will be submitted
                       to the GT-ER Coordinator.
      
      > >		GT-ER    - PIR
      
      Another proposal directly from GT-ER for 3 PIR's again, with the goal
      of keeping local traffic within the country. This is in the final stage 
      of discussion and in preparation for presentation to the Steering Group
      the GT-ER coordination suggests the following changes:
      
      Section 4. raise the minimum circuit to a PIR to E1(2Mbps) to ensure that
                 the traffic already seen between Embratel and RNP can be
                 accomodated.
      
                 The coordination of each PIR must have strong local
                 participation. It appears the best form is to include the 
                 academic sector, local telco, and a council of all PIR 
                 participants. 
      
      This is dated August 26, 1996 and is followed by a similar if not
      identical document to the one on the Embratel site. I think June, 1996 was
      when Brazilian ISP's met to form a national ISP association so I'm not
      sure if they are involved here in any way.
      
      I don't really know Portuguese, just French, Spanish and Latin, but I've
      discovered that I can read Portuguese web pages almost as easily as
      Spanish since they are quite close linguistically. However it is always
      possible that I have grossly misinterpreted some word so, caveat emptor.
      
      Michael Dillon                   -               Internet & ISP Consulting
      Memra Software Inc.              -                  Fax: +1-250-546-3049
      http://www.memra.com             -               E-mail: michael at memra dot com