[In the message entitled "Re: NAP Architecture" on Oct 29, 8:25, "Ben Kirkpatrick, ELI" writes:]
Forgive my ignorance on these matters, but why haven't many NAPS tried
to be L1 based, or at least provide the option of private wire/fiber
between the larger customers in the same room. It seems to me that this
would significantly reduce the complexity and packet-loss we're currently
seeing. How long would it take to troubleshoot a cross-over FE compared
to trouble shooting two routers connected via a oversubscribed switch.
Marketing types are concerned about how to bill and track these, but
there should be some easy ways around those issues.
This is a critical issue now. MFS is charging up to $1000 per 50'
stretch of wire, for cross-connects between consenting parties at
mae-west.
I think this is bit high, for $27 worth of wire, and $300 worth of
labour.
Is there a way that we can collectively negotiate a lower rate for private
cross connects at the maes?
Yes, by competition. A smaller telco should offer a better rate at nearby
sites. However, then you loose whatever you invested in getting a rack at
each NAP.
--Ben Kirkpatrick
"Consciousness: that annoying time between naps."
PS: Probable ELI OC192 cut 25miles south of Seattle (again). Who's laying
new fiber on the I-5 corridor and running us over?
[In the message entitled "Re: NAP Architecture" on Oct 29, 8:25, "Ben
Kirkpatrick, ELI" writes:]
Forgive my ignorance on these matters, but why haven't many NAPS tried
to be L1 based, or at least provide the option of private wire/fiber
between the larger customers in the same room. It seems to me that this
would significantly reduce the complexity and packet-loss we're currently
seeing. How long would it take to troubleshoot a cross-over FE compared
to trouble shooting two routers connected via a oversubscribed switch.
Marketing types are concerned about how to bill and track these, but
there should be some easy ways around those issues.
This is a critical issue now. MFS is charging up to $1000 per 50'
stretch of wire, for cross-connects between consenting parties at
mae-west.
I think this is bit high, for $27 worth of wire, and $300 worth of
labour.
Is there a way that we can collectively negotiate a lower rate for private
cross connects at the maes?
Being a neutral colo facility, we decided not to charge for interconnects
between ISPs....it facilitates the interconnectivity and enhances our NAP
and provides backup in case of failure. So far, it has been accepted by a
majority of our colo customers.
Yes, by competition. A smaller telco should offer a better rate at nearby
sites. However, then you loose whatever you invested in getting a rack at
each NAP.
Well, yeah; but I think the question was: how do they justify that
price? Anything _more_ useful than "what the amrket will bear"?
--Ben Kirkpatrick
"Consciousness: that annoying time between naps."
This wasn't an _intentional_ pun, right?
PS: Probable ELI OC192 cut 25miles south of Seattle (again). Who's laying
new fiber on the I-5 corridor and running us over?
