Background Brief The need to foster the IXPs ecosystem in the Arab region The Internet has become a shared global public medium that is driving social and economic development worldwide. Its distributed connectivity model, being by nature a network of networks, has offered over the past decades tremendous potential for creativity and innovation, and has enabled a booming growth. Internet users have grown from tens of millions in the early 90s to over 3.7 billion this year, fast approaching half of the world s population, compared to only 1% in 1995. (Source Internet World Stats) In the Arab world, individuals using the Internet represent 41.6%, as per the ITU ICT Facts and Figures 2016 Report. This is slightly lower than the world average which accounts for 47.1%. Nevertheless, as per the CISCO Visual Networking Index (VNI) Forecast 2015-2020, IP traffic is growing fastest in the Middle East and Africa. Reliable and stable interconnection between all those networks that constitute the Internet, has proven to be critically important to the development of the overall Internet ecosystem across Asia, Europe and North America, and has put Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) at the heart of this development. Today the further development of IXPs, especially in emerging regions and in areas with potential user growth, is expected to play a key role in connecting the remaining billions to the Internet. Over the past few years, development in that area, has been tangible in South America and in Africa, whether in terms of national IXP numbers, as well as in terms of regional connectivity and the amount of traffic exchanged. In the Arab region, on the other hand, while activities for advancing national IXPs have witnessed recent momentum, resulting in a few success stories in some cases, nevertheless, on average, the development in this area is clearly still lagging behind, both on the national as well as on the regional connectivity levels. The Internet Exchange Map from TeleGeography lists 10 IXPs in the Arab region, spanning seven countries, out of a total of 606 IXPs worldwide. The Internet Exchange Directory of Packet Clearing House (PCH) lists 11 Arab countries with some IXP activities, ranging from an active IXP, to a planned one, or a de-functioned one, out of a total of 811 IXPs activities globally. While, it is true that some IXPs located in Arab countries, may be less active than others, there seems to be also some IXPs in the region that have not registered their presence, or are still under establishment. Generally, the advancement of the IXP cause in the region and the strive to boost regional connectivity on a pan Arab level, deserves further attention and more collaborative work. There is obvious need to support and develop current IXPs as well as grow their numbers in accordance with the growing Internet traffic in the region. There is also need to foster connectivity on a regional level, given the geographical proximity, the language and culture commonality and accordingly the similarity of Internet content and usage trends within the Arab countries. In this context, it may be reasonable to briefly describe the benefits of IXPs to the overall development of the Internet ecosystem in the Arab region. This is meant for both regulators and policymakers, as well as Internet service providers and telecom operators to consider the importance of establishing and joining local IXPs and creating an environment conducive to the growth of national and regional exchange points. 1
The benefits of routing local Internet traffic via a common exchange point, are numerous and provide both operators and end users with many advantages: International links are often more expensive, slower and more congested. ISPs can make substantial cost savings, by reducing their dependency on those links; Local users are offered more bandwidth at more affordable prices, as the overall costs of capacity is lowered, thus improving affordability of Internet services; Internet service quality is enhanced, as local traffic is routed to its destination via a much smaller number of hops, causing a substantial reduction in latency and an enhanced user experience; The broader the customer base that can be reached through the IXP, the greater the opportunities are for local content providers and services that require high speed connections at lower costs; ISPs get to choose between different carrier options that are made available through the IXP to route their upstream traffic, resulting in a more competitive wholesale transit market, where switching between transit providers is as simple as a router configuration change; Once established, the IXP becomes a natural location to host other key services that further improve speed and reliability of Internet access to end users, such as DNS servers for the country s cctld and other key gtlds, root server mirrors, and time servers, in addition to traffic measurement facilities such as looking glasses and routing measurement tools; In terms of improving reliability of domestic Internet services, the presence of a local IXP enables the formation of agreements to be used in events of international cable cuts and disruption of upstream Internet links, where a member uses the IXP as a temporary route to the Internet via another member s network. Accordingly, IXPs have a positive impact on developing the Internet ecosystem in a region, by increasing usage, attracting content, improving user experience and decreasing access costs. Yet in turn they also benefit from a strong user base if they are able to grow into a well-established facility. A strong IXP, usually supported by an enabling environment, that is liberalized, competitive and has access to international cabling, can position itself as a regional hub and further increase its benefit and impact. The attached questionnaire has the purpose of gathering necessary information from the different stakeholders in the region, in order to assess the present situation of IXPs in Arab countries, and elaborate a vision for the further development of this ecosystem. Please complete the questionnaire and send it back to ArabIXPsProject@gmail.com. 2
Questionnaire to Telecom Operators and ISPs in Arab Countries In the framework of advancing the development of Internet Exchange Points in the Arab region; and in accordance with the decisions of the Council of Arab ICT Ministers to move forward the implementation of the Arab project on regional interconnection of Internet networks within the Arab region; The International Telecommunication Union Arab Regional Office, in cooperation with the League of Arab States, are undertaking a study to address the Reality and perspectives of Internet Exchange Points in the Arab Region and the impact on Internet traffic. The purpose of this questionnaire is to gather necessary information from the different telecom operators in the region, in order to assess the present situation of IXPs in Arab countries, and elaborate a vision for the further development of this ecosystem. Disclaimer: The information solicited through this questionnaire will only be used within the context of the ITU study and in assessing the present situation of IXPs in Arab region. No individual information will be shared with any third party. Please complete the questionnaire and send it back to ArabIXPsProject@gmail.com. 1. All information provided will only be used in aggregate form, unless otherwise authorized by the respondent. Do you authorize us to cite your views individually: a. Yes b. No 2. General Data - Please indicate the below information: a. Name of your organization b. Country(s) where you operate c. Your website and contact information 3. What is the average latency experienced by your customers for accessing domestic content that is on a competitor s network, when routed through your international gateway? 4. What is the cost of international transit per Mbit/s per month and are those costs based on leased or selfowned capacity? 5. What is the cost of local wholesale Internet traffic per Mbit/s per month through national infrastructure? 6. Which international submarine cable(s) do you have bandwidth on (whether leased or owned)? 7. Which regional infrastructure cables (submarine or terrestrial) connect you to operators in other Arab countries (please describe briefly)? 1
8. What are the prices set for cross connection between international submarine cables that land in your country / landing facility? 9. What are the prices set for international / regional networks wishing to peer within your country / landing facility? 10. Do you have caching infrastructure for large international content providers and CDNs (such as Google, Akamai or others) locally connected to your network: a. Yes (please elaborate) b. No 11. Which international / regional / or local content provider(s) do you believe would be most influential in reducing your international transit costs and improving service quality for your end customers, if connected locally to your network? 12. In terms of Arabic content providers, are there any you believe would add value to your customers if hosted domestically or connected regionally? 13. Is there a local IXP(s) established in your country / is it active: a. Established and active (please indicated its name /city) b. Established but not yet active c. Planned d. None 14. Are you a member of the local IXP in your country: a. Yes b. No 15. If you are a member of a local IXP in your country please respond to the below: General information i. When did you join the IXP? ii. What is the bandwidth capacity of your connection to the IXP? iii. What is the aggregate traffic you exchange with other IXP members during peak hours? iv. How (or why) did you join the IXP: a. You are a founding member of the IXP b. Local peering is mandated by telecom regulations in your country (please elaborate) c. You have estimated there is value in joining 2
d. The IXP provides a venue to reach other networks more efficiently and through one connection (please describe briefly) e. You have joined as a trial phase Structure i. Who operates your IXP? ii. Do you participate in the operation of your local IXP: a. Yes (please describe briefly) b. No c. Not available iii. Do you own your own equipment at the IXP: a. Yes (please describe briefly) a. No b. Not available iv. Which model best describes your IXP structure: a. Independent non-profit entity b. Non-profit entity managed by ISP association c. Commercial entity d. Government entity e. Research & Education or Academic supported project f. Other (please describe) v. Which statement(s) best describes the role of the government at your local IXP: (Please choose more than one option if they apply) a. Setting up the IXP was facilitated by the government b. Government funds the IXP c. Government operates the IXP d. Government is represented on the IXP board / management e. IXP is licensed by the telecom regulator / government f. Government is a peering member at the IXP g. Other (please describe) Facility i. Which statement best describes your perception of the IXP facility: a. Neutral b. Carrier Neutral c. Carrier / Telco / ISP Collocated d. Other (please describe) ii. What connectivity infrastructure is available at your local IXP: (Please choose more than one option if they apply) a. Wireless b. Fixed wire / copper c. Fiber d. Dark Fiber e. Other (please describe) 3
Services i. Please list services available at your local IXP: (Please choose more than one option if they apply) a. Basic peering (please describe connections types) b. MRTG services c. Looking glass d. Root server mirrors e. cctld server f. Other (please indicate) ii. Does your IXP provide transit services or allow for transit connections: a. Yes (please indicate fees) b. No iii. What costs do you encountered in joining: (Please elaborate on amounts) a. One-time subscription fees b. Recurring membership / peering fees c. Set-up /connection costs to reach the IXP d. No fees e. Other (please describe) Policies i. Which statement best describes the Peering Policy at your local IXP: (Please indicate which peering policy you use) a. Mandatory multilateral peering agreement 1 b. Bilateral peering agreement 2 c. Both bilateral & multilateral peering agreements d. Other (please describe) ii. Which statement best describes the Membership Policy at your local IXP: (Please choose more than one option if applies) a. Open only to ISPs and licensed operators b. Has a selection criteria that extends beyond ISPs ( please describe) c. Open to regional or international operators / carriers (please describe) d. Open to regional or international content providers ( please describe) e. Open to any interested entity f. Other (please describe) iii. Do you participate in setting the peering policies or membership policies at your local IXP: a. Yes (please describe briefly) 1 Participants are required to interconnect with all other participants. 2 Participants can establish their own interconnection policy and negotiate interconnection agreements with the other members 4
16. Other b. No c. Not available Value and impact i. Do you see value in peering at the facility: a. Yes (please describe briefly) b. No ii. Have you observed reductions in latency for accessing local traffic after joining your local IXP: a. Yes (please indicate average latency before / after joining) b. No iii. Have you observed reductions in costs related to transmission of local content: a. Yes (please describe briefly) b. No iv. Has your connection to the IXP reduced / or totally eliminated tromboning 3 with other IXP members: a. Yes fully 4 b. Yes partially a. Not at all (please describe) Please provide any other information you wish to include. 3 Tromboning is the process of exchanging domestic traffic among national ISPs across their international upstream connections 4 All local /domestic traffic between members is exchanged through the IXP 5