[ncc-regional-middle-east] Regional Peering
Khalid Ismael kismael at emirates.net.ae
Sat May 27 11:52:44 CEST 2006
Dear Malik, I have just performed a trace route and it is working fine. Below is a trace route to the same site: C:\>tracert www.batelco.com.bh Tracing route to www.batelco.com.bh [193.188.112.74] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 213.42.1.195 2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 213.42.1.113 3 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 195.229.0.241 4 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 195.229.31.76 5 20 ms 12 ms 12 ms 195.229.28.46 6 18 ms 14 ms 13 ms 217.17.233.212 7 * * * Request timed out. 8 12 ms 12 ms 12 ms arabic.batelco.com.bh [193.188.112.74] Below trace route problem could be because bahrain route was not announced to UAE at that time. Best Regards, Khalid Ismael Malik Awan wrote: >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 [mailto:aqrabawi at emirates.net.ae] >>Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 1:20 AM >>To: mawan at cmu.edu; ncc-regional-middle-east at ripe.net >>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 at ripe.net [mailto:ncc-regional-middle- >>east-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Malik Awan >>Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 1:16 AM >>To: ncc-regional-middle-east at ripe.net >>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 at ripe.net [mailto:ncc-regional- >>> >>> >>middle- >> >> >>>east-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Saleem Albalooshi >>>Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 12:20 AM >>>To: ncc-regional-middle-east at ripe.net >>>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 at ripe.net >>>>[mailto:ncc-regional-middle-east-admin at ripe.net] *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 at ripe.net >>>>*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 at ripe.net 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 at ripe.net >>>>*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 [mailto:Fahad at 2connectbahrain.com] >>>>*Sent:* Wed 5/24/2006 12:30 PM >>>>*To:* Salman Al-Mannai; 'Saleem Albalooshi' >>>>*Cc:* 'John Leong'; ncc-regional-middle-east at ripe.net >>>>*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 [mailto:salmannai at ict.gov.qa] >>>>*Sent:* 24 May 2006 11:10 >>>>*To:* Saleem Albalooshi; Fahad AlShirawi >>>>*Cc:* John Leong; ncc-regional-middle-east at ripe.net >>>>*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 at ripe.net on behalf of Saleem >>>>Albalooshi >>>>*Sent:* Wed 5/24/2006 12:58 AM >>>>*To:* Fahad AlShirawi >>>>*Cc:* 'John Leong'; ncc-regional-middle-east at ripe.net >>>>*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 at ripe.net >>>>>[mailto:ncc-regional-middle-east-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of John >>>>> >>>>> >>Leong >> >> >>>>>Sent: 22 May 2006 11:58 >>>>>To: Saleem Albalooshi; ncc-regional-middle-east at ripe.net >>>>>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 at nic.ae> >>>>>To: <ncc-regional-middle-east at ripe.net> >>>>>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. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > > > > > -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ncc-regional-middle-east/attachments/20060527/13fd152e/attachment.html>