Africa: Local IXPs and Regional Carriers Russell Southwood, Balancing Act http:www'balancingactafric

1
Africa Local IXPs and Regional CarriersRussell
Southwood, Balancing Acthttp//www.balancingact-a
frica.com
2
Why Im here

• We run a free weekly e-letter on telecoms,
  internet and computing that goes out to 6,400
  subscribers in private sector and government
• Consultancy, specifically RXP study for
  Connectivity Africa
• Viewpoint Regional internet industry

3
The Starting Point

• AfrISPAs policy statement - the Halfway
  Proposition
• US400m a year in foreign exchange exported from
  Africa to foreign carriers to carry traffic from
  one African country to another

4
Crude cost comparisons
Cost of transporting local traffic is 17 times
lower than International traffic. Impact of
monopoly incumbent telcos pricing power
5
The growth of local IXPs

• Arguments reduction in operating costs
  reduction in end-user costs increase in local
  hosting and service.
• Mantra Keep local traffic local
• Currently nine IXPs .SA, .MZ, .ZW, .EG, .KE, .NG
  (Lagos soon on-stream), .TZ,.UG .CD

6
The impact of a local IXP

• Kenyan IXP online in 2002. Started with 4 ISPs,
  now 10 are connected
• Usually 200-900 millisecond delay per hop
  internationally. 30-60 millisecond latency
  locally
• 20-25 of all traffic and growth of streaming
  services

7
The next step Regional Exchange Points

• Connecting up the IXPs to exchange
  inter-continental traffic and creating regional
  traffic to be peered internationally
• Background to the debates earlier proposal for
  PAVIX
• Connectivity Africa study Two options - PAVIX
  revisited and regional carrier/s
• Regulatory issues (VSAT in SA)

8
African internet exchange - the birth of regional
carriers

• Meeting at iWeek in Joburg in September.
  Decision to issue a Request For Service from IXPs
  from six countries through AfrISPA
• Considerable interest from potential regional
  carriers
• Likely to be meshed VSAT network.Little or no
  inter-country fibre but beginning to change

9
Six countries issuing RFS

• Chosen IXPs, scale of traffic, willing. Others
  to follow
• 1. Johannesburg Internet Exchange JINX
  Johannesburg, South Africa
• 2. Kenya Internet Exchange Point KIXP Nairobi,
  Kenya
• 3. Mozambique Internet Exchange MOZ-IX Maputo,
  Mozambique
• 4. Uganda Internet Exchange Point UIXP
  Kampala, Uganda
• 5. Tanzania Internet Exchange Point TIXP Dar
  es Salaam, Tanzania
• 6. Lagos Internet Exchange Lagos, Nigeria soon
  to be operational

10
What marks out this approach

• Self-help - driven by the internet industry and
  its needs and those of its customers
• Can be encouraged by regulation but beyond basic
  open door does not require it
• Does not require governments to be anything but
  facilitating and supportive
• Relatively fast decision-making

11
Support from DFID and others

• CATIA - DFID supported by others including
  Canadian Govt
• 1C Creating a policy environment to bring about
  key changes required
• 1F Support for lobbying at an international
  level. Recognising shift from ITU to WTO.
• Practical assistance from PCH and self-created
  institutions like AFNOG

12
Here comes troublePart 1

• Internet and telecoms inextricably linked
• Lack of effective competition in telecoms in
  Africa a big part of the problem
• Monopoly incumbent telcos keep prices up. Their
  influence on SAT3 pricing. Int vs regional
  half-circuits 11 vs 14 by Telkom SA

13
Here comes troublePart 2

• Impact of monopoly telco ISPs on growth of the
  business. Worst example SONATEL in Senegal. 80
  of market. De-facto, legal monopoly. No effective
  anti-competition laws. Almost no IXPs in
  Francophone Africa.
• Growth of VOIP. Undercuts existing incumbents but
  is way forward (Telkom SA) Feared by Govt and
  regulators. Regional data networks may achieve
  what monopoly incumbents failed to do

14
What role for the ITU and why?

• Accounting rate system is all but dead. ITU is
  slow to make decisions. Byzantine representative
  structure. Developing world discussions dominated
  by monopoly incumbents. Has little internet
  expertise.
• Be humble. Work with those who are already
  addressing these problems regionally.