Non-profit IX vs. neutral for-profit IX

[clayton at MNSi.Net (Clayton Zekelman)]

TorIX is a great example of a not for profit IX that is very successful.

https://www.torix.ca/

A very dedicated team of people provide an incredible level of service.

Thave a very transparent process.  Their pricing 
is listed up front on their website:

https://www.torix.ca/peering/#pricing



At 09:03 AM 21/12/2018, Mike Hammett wrote:
>As far as neutral, I meant separate from the 
>datacenters in which they're housed. People in 
>NA seem to think there are only two kinds of 
>IXes, Equinix, DRT, Coresite types and NWAX, SIX, MICE types.
>
>
>
>-----
>Mike Hammett
><http://www.ics-il.com/>Intelligent Computing Solutions
>
><http://www.midwest-ix.com/>Midwest Internet Exchange
>
><http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>The Brothers WISP
>
>
>----------
>From: "Tim Raphael" <raphael.timothy at gmail.com>
>To: "NANOG Mailing List" <nanog at nanog.org>
>Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2018 8:39:42 PM
>Subject: Re: Non-profit IX vs. neutral for-profit IX
>
>The other point to consider is that a NFP can 
>justify more locations and offer services (such 
>as extended reach) that don�t have the same 
>profit margins or ROI as for-profits.
>This often leads to greater value to those with 
>smaller networks and fewer customers allowing 
>them to grow and expand without increased 
>aggregation or transit costs. This in-turn leads 
>to a richer array of providers and chips away at 
>the monopolies in niche markets.
>
>The NFP IXP I work for focuses on providing 
>value to the broader community and the Internet 
>as a whole - especially somewhere like Australia which has unique constraints.
>
>Additionally, �Neutral� and For-Profit 
>doesn�t always compute in my mind, there will 
>always be commercial alliances that lead to not-total neutrality.
>When a NFP is owned by it�s members there has 
>to be 100% transparency in organisational 
>decisions around member funds and resources 
>which ensures accountability reliability.
>
>- Tim
>
>
> > On 21 Dec 2018, at 3:58 am, Brielle Bruns <bruns at 2mbit.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 12/20/2018 12:51 PM, Aaron wrote:
> >> Probably price.  Also perception of 
> value.  If you're a for profit enterprise then 
> they're paying for interconnection plus your 
> bump.  If you're non-profit the perception is 
> that there is a larger value because there's no 
> bump.  Whether that's true or not, who knows 
> but that's the perception I've heard.
> >
> > Depending on the size of the non-profit, I'd 
> almost compare it to how the hospitals are here in Boise.
> >
> > The non-profits are oversized, monopolistic, 
> price gouging, etc.  Their care can be pretty 
> meh, esp since they bought up all the little 
> independent clinics (yay, ER pricing for a basic family clinic visit).
> >
> > The for-profit smaller clinics and hospitals 
> run a pretty tight ship, better value for their 
> money, service is very good, and compete with 
> one another for who has the best service.
> >
> > People think they are getting 'better' 
> because they are going to a place that is 
> supposed to be run to benefit people over 
> profit, but alas, you'd be very very wrong.
> > --
> > Brielle Bruns
> > The Summit Open Source Development Group
> > http://www.sosdg.org    /     http://www.ahbl.org
> >
>
>

-- 

Clayton Zekelman
Managed Network Systems Inc. (MNSi)
3363 Tecumseh Rd. E
Windsor, Ontario
N8W 1H4

tel. 519-985-8410
fax. 519-985-8409        
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20181221/ed3475b8/attachment.html>