new NAP in St. Louis?

A colleague who isn't subscribed to NANOG-post wanted me to forward this
question. It seems that an outfit called 'LevelOne' has announced they are
opening a NAP in St. Louis, but neither he nor I have heard of them before.
Anybody on the list with prior experience, or even hearsay, that could
confirm/deny or shed some additional light?

thanks,

s/Level/Layer/

sorry about that.

They are a colo provider startup. (www.layerone.com). I would imagine
someone at layerone is going to throw a switch in a rack in their colo and
declare it a public peering point. Unfortunately, demand for public peering
in secondary markets has never been high, even when telecom was at it's
peak.

- Daniel Golding

I am not sure of what Layer one is building in St.
Louis qualifies as a NAP in terms of exisiting NAP's
(maybe a Mini-NAP) but they have been putting together
a product referred to as a NEXUS Optical Distribution
Exchange....you can find more information on this
offering at www.colosource.com under the white paper
section. The paper is Exchanging Problems For
Profits: The NEXUS Optical Distribution Exchange.

Hope this helps,

Kevin

I published an extensive interview with Layer One in May of this year.

Executive summary is available at http://cookreport.com/10.02.shtml

Thanks to all who replied - I now know much more about LayerOne than I did
before, and have passed the info on to my friend in St. Louis.

cheers,

LayerOne is primarily focused on carrier-to-carrier, which is traditionally
accomplished by private SONET interconnects at Carrier hotels or ILEC
facilities. The "private peering" fashion of these interconnects is
technically suboptimal, and recently obsolete with massive broadband DCS
products like Ciena Coredirector that can make carrier interconnection
much cheaper, more scalable, in much less footprint.

But...

private SONET interconnects fit the business strategy just fine, as carriers
are just as aggressive as any ISP at letting business issues drive interconnect
and claiming lack of space or other provisioning issues for stonewalling
requests they don't want to answer.

running type-2 circuits thru a neutral-run DCS places alot of trust in that
point, whereas SONET ADM-to-ADM private interconnects are nicely distributed
and therefore a failure has minimal impact.

Cheers,
-Lane