Re: What is a regional exchange point?

On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Bill Woodcock wrote:

>> I thought the delineation was implicit, in that a "regional"
>> exchange focuses on interconnection within some particular
>> region
> 
> Yes, but that's the definition of an exchange.  Again, I
> repeat: What's the distinction you're making which
> distinguishes a "regional exchange" from an exchange
> generally?

There might not be much of a distinction, but for whatever
reason, many exchanges have decided to classify themselves
as "regional" exchanges. Regional exchange point was defined
as a category at least as far back as 1995 when the Tuscon
NAP (which called itself a REP) was started. When Utah REP
was started shortly after, we felt we fit in that category
better than what everyone mis-called "national access
points".

I find when I talk to other REP operators we share a lot in
common in the social and technical structures of our
exchanges, while I find I don't share as much in common with
"national" exchange operators. Some REPs may share much more
in common with national exchanges.

It could very well be that REPs are just smaller-scale
exchanges that serve a sub-set of the peers that are found
at larger exchanges. It could be that REPs are technically
similar but are serving audiences that other exchanges
don't. Maybe REPs grow up to become just like other
exchanges, maybe not. It's hard to tell now, because a lot
of REPs have not yet (or just recently) found a fit with
momentum to become self-sustaining.

Maybe it's a matter of who we are trying to bring to the
exchange, or different geographies, or the reasons our
communities value our exchanges, how our exchanges are
funded, how they are operated, how they are supported. As a
REP gains momentum, it could very possibly lose these 
distinctions and become like other exchanges.

The exchange I run is decidedly regional. Our MLPA requires
that all participants share all regional routes with all
other participants. If peers want to do bi-laterals or share
other routes, that's their business, but they cannot peer
without sharing their regional routes. The organization is
also structured that each organization only gets one vote,
regardless of their size or participation. These policies
may drive away a lot of networks that we'd love to have peer
their regional routes, but it ensures that the exchange will
meet the needs of a lot of peers who would otherwise not be
able to peer with each other. Other REPs may have different
policies.

Pete.