Does anyone have any info on if MAE-EAST allows collocation of a 7507 now or
is it still stated that the size has to be about the size of a 7010.
Please return email direct to tstroup@fibernet.net
Thanks.
Todd R. Stroup
Fiber Network Solutions, Inc.
The "standard" MAE product comes with 1/2 rack of colocation space, and a
specific amount of 110VAC or -48VDC power, which I can't recall at the
moment. A Cisco 7507 and CSU/DSU will easily fit in that amount of space.
More space and/or power are available at additional cost.
You'll need to check with an MFS sales rep for pricing, and to see what
the power restrictions are.
Steve Feldman
MFS Worldcom (or whoever we are this week!)
There are lots of 7513's so I doubt a 7507 would be a problem - the only
restriction on equipment is no computers on the MAE EAST LAN for security
reasons. Given the ability to bridge MAE EAST I'm not sure how that can be
enforced. And Netscape has some mighty big SGI's promintently displayed as
you walk in. Oh and another restrictiuon should you ever need it -- to
run a $5 piece of ethernet cable 10' from one rack to another (assuming the
two racks are diffrent companies eg. a cross connect) is $2000/month.
.stb
There are lots of 7513's so I doubt a 7507 would be a problem - the only
restriction on equipment is no computers on the MAE EAST LAN for security
reasons. Given the ability to bridge MAE EAST I'm not sure how that can be
enforced. And Netscape has some mighty big SGI's promintently displayed as
you walk in.
Last I'd heard, Netscape's boxen were plugged into a router (not
sure whose these days.) There's also somebody there with an OS/2 machine,
but I have no idea who or why, or where it's plugged in.
Oh and another restrictiuon should you ever need it -- to run a $5 piece
of ethernet cable 10' from one rack to another (assuming the two racks
are diffrent companies eg. a cross connect) is $2000/month.
Wow. I knew it was gonna be a lot, but that's a /whole/ lot.
There are lots of 7513's so I doubt a 7507 would be a problem - the only
restriction on equipment is no computers on the MAE EAST LAN for security
reasons. Given the ability to bridge MAE EAST I'm not sure how that can be
enforced. And Netscape has some mighty big SGI's promintently displayed as
you walk in.Last I'd heard, Netscape's boxen were plugged into a router (not
sure whose these days.) There's also somebody there with an OS/2 machine,
but I have no idea who or why, or where it's plugged in.
traceroute to ftp23.netscape.com (204.152.166.47)
it is sitting at MAE-EAST
-craig
Yeah. If you were to buy a ethernet handoff from UUNET, it would still
cost $2000 for a ethernet cross-connect. I think the idea is, if you come to
MAE EAST, use the GigaSwitch or don't come. MFS is such a nice company.
.stb
It would be a good idea for MFS to decrease this price for those people
connected to the GigaSwitch. No reason to discourage private
interconnects, especially since they take load off of the GigaSwitch.
Maybe cable organization is the issue...
Chris
Cable organization is not the issue. MFS is upfront about why they charge
$2000/month for a cross connect - to encourage use of it's existing services.
MFS is discouraging private interconnects within the MFS colocation. The
is done so that they can capture revenue by selling more GigaSwitch
ports. This is being done at the exspense of the MAE's performance.
Soapbox on:
This would not be the first time a company put it's own best interest
ahead of it's customers, but given the community trust ISP's place with
MFS to provide the best possible NAP, I don't think it's a positive mark
for MFS and raises, again, the validity of having a single major NAP/MAE
player for each metro area.
As well brings up the fundamentals of a NAP being run by a telco. There
are conflicting interests. MAE EAST was conceptually a UUNET creation and
UUNET thought at the time a single carrier would be the best host for a
MAE. That descion has, historically, shown to be very 1-sided by design
or not (probaly not, but who knows what relationship dynamics were at
play between UUNET/MFS in the early 1990's).
.stb
How many exchange points have shared media, i.e. hub and spoke topology,
and how many rely exclusively on a mesh of cross-connects? Is there any
data to show whether or not the mesh of cross-connects will scale high
enough to be usable for major NAP's? If so, it would not be difficult
to set up such an exchange point in which people basically pay for rack
space, power and the installation of cross-connects.
Michael Dillon - Internet & ISP Consulting
Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-250-546-3049
http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael@memra.com
If part of your business was public interconnects why would you want to
help private interconnects? I think you are right though, at the
Atlanta-NAP we wanted to draw some of the big players, and one of the ways
to do this was to let them do private interconnects over the gigaswitch of
cascade 500 and then let them peer with people if they wanted to.
Nathan Stratton President, NetRail,Inc.
Intelligent business knows when machines get overloaded and how to make
money by allowing people to circumvent their network. One can assume that if
the price for private interconnects were somewhat more reasonable more
people would come to the MAE's. Enforcing a poorly planned economy even at
this small a level is not the best way to make money.
MAE-Houston, a small NAP in the scheme of things, but it makes for a good
example so we'll use it. $2000/month to get your foot in the door, then
another large chunk of cash to connect to the Gigaswitch which all things
considered, isn't really needed. Rather than waste their money on equipment
that all in all just doesn't need to be there, why not make it more economic
for local players to get involved and cross connect to eachother. In the end
you not only save money by not bringing in useless hardware but you garner
more customers by lessening the price of the private interconnect.
Think about it:
Assume you have 5 customers at your NAP, all paying $5000/month for the
local loop to the NAP + a connect to the Gigaswitch. You're making
25k/month, which if I guess correctly (and I could be way off, considering
I'm not really up on my figures) covers your costs and payroll with perhaps
1-5k left over profit.
Now take 20 customers all paying 3000/month for rack space and private
interconnects. You don't have the overhead of the Gigaswitch, you have less
people (less payroll expenses) and you're making $60,000/month. Less
overhead, more profit.
[-] Brett L. Hawn (blh @ nol dot net) [-]
[-] Networks On-Line - Houston, Texas [-]
[-] 713-467-7100 [-]