Page 1 of 2

PIPE Peering

Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 10:20 pm
by tocpcs
Is it at all advantageous in offering a PIPE peering quota to users to encourage utilisation of the PIPE link over the regular links?

Even if its not unlimited and limited to same state only, would something like 40GB PIPE traffic be in the region of possible to offer users as an addition?

The reason I ask is I always found PIPE a valuable resource, with online radio, etc.

Now, Exetel's plans are great value, no doubts there, but I think PIPE utilisation according to the graphs is 300Mb/s out of 1Gbps..

I thought perhaps incentives for users to use PIPE might cause that link to be more utilised.

I would listen to online radio, but its gonna take it out of my quota, which is bad, if it came off a "PIPE only" quota, I'd utilise PIPE and focus on using PIPE over other resources (like using iiNet's FTP instead of just getting it from wherever I find it), this has the addon effect of reducing load on international links..

What does everyone else think?

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:00 am
by ottyacat
Well frankly i don't really care, i use my monthly quota every month, generally to the limit if not more (even if its costs me more). I don't care who its delivered by, optus, pipe, verizon, as long as Exetel provides me with contended-less uninterrupted access. & I do mean access to standard services during peak times (non P2p) http, ssh access to the servers i monitor, i am happy. I am yet to find another ISP who can supply me with the P2P bandwidth i use during off-peak & excellent downloads & transit times during peak times.

That said of course i would be in favor of a less counted pipe bandwidth, :D. But at the cost of a lessor standard then i would greatly oppose it.

Also, you must take into account that out of the many thousands of customers, only a small amount of customers may be be able to figure out what the main route their downloads are originating from.

My thoughts only, will be great to hear from others.

Cheers.

Re: PIPE Peering

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:43 am
by ForumAdmin
tocpcs wrote:Is it at all advantageous in offering a PIPE peering quota to users to encourage utilisation of the PIPE link over the regular links?

Even if its not unlimited and limited to same state only, would something like 40GB PIPE traffic be in the region of possible to offer users as an addition?

The reason I ask is I always found PIPE a valuable resource, with online radio, etc.

Now, Exetel's plans are great value, no doubts there, but I think PIPE utilisation according to the graphs is 300Mb/s out of 1Gbps..

I thought perhaps incentives for users to use PIPE might cause that link to be more utilised.

I would listen to online radio, but its gonna take it out of my quota, which is bad, if it came off a "PIPE only" quota, I'd utilise PIPE and focus on using PIPE over other resources (like using iiNet's FTP instead of just getting it from wherever I find it), this has the addon effect of reducing load on international links..

What does everyone else think?
PIPE is simply one resource that's in place to provide an overall service.

As it costs Exetel money to provide there's no reason why it should be free.

What is true is that PIPE provides data at a lower cost than data provided via the Optus and Verizon links (which themselves cost Exetel different amounts). Exetel's pricing to end users for plans is based on a theoretical average cost using all three links.

There is nothing "free" about PIPE traffic compared to any other traffic from Optus or Verizon and you need to remember than the bandwidth between you and Exetel (which would be used to carry "free" traffic) costs a lot of money and doesn't differentiate in cost between the source of the downloaded traffic and neither do the routers that switch that traffic.

Re: PIPE Peering

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:12 am
by tocpcs
ForumAdmin wrote:
tocpcs wrote:Is it at all advantageous in offering a PIPE peering quota to users to encourage utilisation of the PIPE link over the regular links?

Even if its not unlimited and limited to same state only, would something like 40GB PIPE traffic be in the region of possible to offer users as an addition?

The reason I ask is I always found PIPE a valuable resource, with online radio, etc.

Now, Exetel's plans are great value, no doubts there, but I think PIPE utilisation according to the graphs is 300Mb/s out of 1Gbps..

I thought perhaps incentives for users to use PIPE might cause that link to be more utilised.

I would listen to online radio, but its gonna take it out of my quota, which is bad, if it came off a "PIPE only" quota, I'd utilise PIPE and focus on using PIPE over other resources (like using iiNet's FTP instead of just getting it from wherever I find it), this has the addon effect of reducing load on international links..

What does everyone else think?
PIPE is simply one resource that's in place to provide an overall service.

As it costs Exetel money to provide there's no reason why it should be free.

What is true is that PIPE provides data at a lower cost than data provided via the Optus and Verizon links (which themselves cost Exetel different amounts). Exetel's pricing to end users for plans is based on a theoretical average cost using all three links.

There is nothing "free" about PIPE traffic compared to any other traffic from Optus or Verizon and you need to remember than the bandwidth between you and Exetel (which would be used to carry "free" traffic) costs a lot of money and doesn't differentiate in cost between the source of the downloaded traffic and neither do the routers that switch that traffic.
I already realise that, but as you indicated, the costs of the link are cheaper than Optus, etc.

I was coming from the angle of encouraging traffic on that link to reduce loading from others.

I realise your costs incorporate the cost of that link and the data back to the user, but consider the 20c GB Unlimited P2P, that is what is an interesting angle, and I thought perhaps the PIPE data could become something SIMILAR.

Basically I'm thinking from an angle where it wouldn't be disadvantageous to Exetel (and infact more a cost advantage) to encourage data usage by PIPE in some way, shape or form, without obviously destroying much value in the current plans to facilitate it..

Add on pack or something?

EDIT: I'm still confused where you got the idea I thought it was free ForumAdmin.. I don't think I mentioned the word free at all in my post...

Posted: Mon Sep 03, 2007 3:30 pm
by tocpcs
Maybe if I placed the idea out there differently:

30GB of PIPE access: $10 (quota is in addition to normal quota).

Still a no?

(In the above, I assume 20c/GB is viable).

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:05 pm
by austdata
tocpcs wrote:Maybe if I placed the idea out there differently:

30GB of PIPE access: $10 (quota is in addition to normal quota).

Still a no?

(In the above, I assume 20c/GB is viable).
If Pipe could supply bandwidth at $0.20 a Gigabyte every man and his dog would use it. At least for e-mail accounts.

Off the top of my head, it would be closer to $0.35 a Gigabyte at the absolutely imposable rate of 100% efficiency over a one gigabit pipe. No infrastructure, logistics, employees, etc. etc. etc. and no profit.

While I get where you're going with this, and I think it may be workable, the additional bandwidth and cost would be an "off-set" to the existing quota (I think). However, the the drain on general bandwidth would still be increased and it is intolerable at the moment.

Any additional bandwidth use needs to be supplied via a different source, or the pipe needs to be greatly increased.

Cheers,

Mike

Posted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:15 pm
by tocpcs
austdata wrote:
tocpcs wrote:Maybe if I placed the idea out there differently:

30GB of PIPE access: $10 (quota is in addition to normal quota).

Still a no?

(In the above, I assume 20c/GB is viable).
If Pipe could supply bandwidth at $0.20 a Gigabyte every man and his dog would use it. At least for e-mail accounts.

Off the top of my head, it would be closer to $0.35 a Gigabyte at the absolutely imposable rate of 100% efficiency over a one gigabit pipe. No infrastructure, logistics, employees, etc. etc. etc. and no profit.

While I get where you're going with this, and I think it may be workable, the additional bandwidth and cost would be an "off-set" to the existing quota (I think). However, the the drain on general bandwidth would still be increased and it is intolerable at the moment.

Any additional bandwidth use needs to be supplied via a different source, or the pipe needs to be greatly increased.

Cheers,

Mike
Drain? Wouldn't it decrease as a result of the lesser usage on international links, which are more expensive?

I think PIPE offers Giga for 1000.00/mth (or was that 3000?), but it was not much. The issue would be transporting it back to the user, and if P2P caching on Exetel's network is 20c a GB (with profit and costs of hardware, etc), then I fail to see how a PIPE pack isn't workable, when you consider that the usage is moving off international links and onto the big fat PIPE link that is dirt cheap in comparison.

If you look at the graphs in Members, you can see the PIPE link is barely touched, (300Mbps), so encouraging users to use more of that 700Mbps that is available, instead of 700Mbps of international bandwidth seems ideal!

And I'd do that, only if given a quota in addition to my current quota, for a slightly increased cost as a result of the added value to the plan, otherwise I'm not going to get the content I was going to (online radio), because I don't really want to use my quota on it as well (and therefore pay $3/GB extra for something that I know can be supplied cheaper).

I thought the concept was a "value adding concept", so that users can get more value out of the service for no additional, or even a saving to Exetel as a result (as the online radio would come from overseas instead, therefore adding to expensive international capacity).

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:40 pm
by dogwomble
I definitely do like the idea of a "PIPE quota". From a utilisation of upstream link, it does make sense since it's the least utilised of the lot.

I think, though, it would be a somewhat complicated one to implement. Some ISP's have successfully done it in the past. But it does involve a lot of consideration because there are still costs involved (the cost of data over the link between you and ExeTel and the cost of the PIPE link itself) as well as the technical issue of counting that data at the routers (which may be more or less complex depending on how this is done already).

My personal point of view (take it or leave it ExeTel staff): Making better use of the ExeTel link is sensible in the sense that it would make better use of the resources that ExeTel already has before purchasing more resources. If something can be done at the routers to count that data at, maybe, 10% less than the total of the transfer (ie. 100mb becomes 90mb), then maybe this is the easiest to implement?

Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 7:47 am
by ForumAdmin
If Exetel could 'direct' traffic to use the PIPE connection it would, obviously, do that.

The traffic that's sourced from PIPE is from connections to PIPE which are mainly local (same State) ISPs and people connected to those ISPs who have data that Exetel users want. This is, overwhelmingly, P2P shared files.

If you want data from any international or inter-State source or any source that isn't connected to PIPE then it will go via Verizon or Optus.

When Exetel set a plan's download inclusion we don't know where any individual customer will source data from. We aggregate the costs of each source (Verizon, Optus and PIPE) and arrive at a cost of ingress/egress data per gb.

So the cost of ingress/egress data is the aggregate of all three sources.

The connection to the customer cost doesn't vary at all - being the port charge plus the connection bandwidth charge. These costs do vary between Telstra, Optus and Powertel - quite considerably.

Exetel provides more data at lower cost than ANY other ISP in Australia and to reduce those costs, at this point in time, isn't possible.

Maybe some time next year, if Exetel does buy ingress/egress bandwidth from Southern Cross direct (not a high probability at this stage) or if the new P2P caching trials set to commence in November prove effective - then some reduction MAY, repeat MAY be possible.

Right now that is all in the unknown future.

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:17 pm
by lordvader
Has PIPE peering been re-enabled in Victoria ?

There was a bit of buzz a while back, and then nothing ...

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 7:33 am
by ForumAdmin
lordvader wrote:Has PIPE peering been re-enabled in Victoria ?

There was a bit of buzz a while back, and then nothing ...
It was delayed.

It's now planned for late November.

Queensland is planned for early November.

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 9:33 pm
by pjb42
Hi all,

Regarding PIPE, I was under the impression that PIPE are in the process of building a National network and that when complete, peering from PIPE will no longer be bound by State/Territory boundaries. Or is that not the case? If it is the case, and it happens (whenever), how feasible (technically/economically) would it be then to steer more traffic (as/when possible) via the PIPE network? Would that make it more viable and cost effective than it is now?

Or... have I just confused everyone (including myself!) LOL

Just curious BTW. :)

Cheers!

Posted: Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:01 pm
by lordvader
... and while we're at it ...

That late November thing ... anything ?

Posted: Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:35 am
by ForumAdmin
lordvader wrote:... and while we're at it ...

That late November thing ... anything ?
It has become the "late December thing" as the work was not completed as expected.

peering in tasmania

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 6:19 pm
by PatrickT
What are the odds of Exetel peering with PIPE in Tasmania? PIPE has dedicated bandwidth across Bass Strait (via Telstra still) whereas the the Telstra Wholesale link that carries current Exetel Tas users to the Melbourne PoP appears hopelessly saturated at all times of the day and night. Will this help solve our high latency issues?

I have visions of being routed via a bit of old copper passing through some old 50s manual exchanges the way things are at the moment.

Hopefully Exetel will be an early adopter of the Tas Govt/Aurora Energy Black Fibre link back to Victoria.