Savvis quality?

Just wondering if anyone can tell me their
opinion on Savvis bandwidth/company preferably
from a web host perspective. Considering a



Have used them since the days of Cable & Wireless - almost flawless.

David Hubbard wrote:

Just wondering if anyone can tell me their
opinion on Savvis bandwidth/company preferably
from a web host perspective. Considering a

I've only had them for three years and I've been extremely happy. They
catch outages faster (if it's down for over a minute they've already
opened a ticket and called me about it) than anyone else I've dealt
with. I'm very much a self-service type of customer and I like their web
account management thing, too. No performance issues I've ever noticed
or heard about. Sadly, I'm going to disconnect it in a few months
because I'm outside of their normal service area and it's cost
prohibitive to upgrade.

If you're in to IPv6 I had talked to them a few months back about it and
I was told it can be done as a custom request. I never perused it though
after the upgrade quotes came in.


They might be a good provider for reaching Comcast (when they're not
advertising inconsistently), but so are Level3 and Global Crossing.

I hear they've got some pretty serious peering problems in the US.

Drive Slow,
Paul Wall

Paul Wall wrote:

I wouldn't touch them with a 10g pole. They were the first and only provider we have dropped for inability to provide reasonable service.

1. They have problems in the bay area (and I've heard other places but I can't confirm) coming up with ports to connect to people on. We had long since outgrown 100mb (was 1g or higher with everyone else) but they couldn't come up with a 1g port to sell us. Then when one became free, they demanded a 700mb commit to get it. After I argued that we never run ports at that level of congestion they backed down to a 500mb commit but that was as low as they'd go. They had no budget to deploy more ports in any of the bay area peering facilities.

2. Their national NOC staff was gut-stripped down to 3 people. 24 hours a day I'd find the same person answering issues we reported. Often outages weren't resolved until they could wake the engineer up. (this isn't surprising in a small company, it's very surprising in a network the size of Savvis)

3. We had repeated issues that needed escalation to our salesperson for credit. We never got calls back on any of these, even when we had escalated through phone, email and paper letters to him.

4. One day they changed the implementation of their community strings to start putting other providers and international customers in their US-Customer-Only community strings. We escalated this issue through management, and the final conclusion was that their community strings advertised to us had to be inconsistent to meet their billing needs. (ie get peers to send them traffic they shouldn't have gotten) We were forced to drop using their community strings and instead build a large complex route-map to determine which traffic should be routed to them. That's nonsense, and was the final straw.

In one of the marathon phone calls with the NOC staff about this, a NOC manager frankly told me that Savvis had been stripped and reamed, and they were just trying to stay alive long enough to sell the low-cost carcass to another provider.

Yeah, I think that pretty much sums it up.

Jo Rhett wrote:

This is quite similar to experiences we have had with them. Again the only carrier we have dropped for technical reasons.

Blake Dunlap