- Previous message: Jay Hennigan: "Re: Tier 2 - Lease?"
- In reply to: Joe Provo: "Re: Tier 2 - Lease?"
- Next in thread: Jay Hennigan: "Re: Tier 2 - Lease?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
|
|
|
From: Marshall Eubanks (no email)
Date: Wed May 03 2006 - 12:46:59 EDT
The tier nomenclature also a really good way to instigate flame fests on
lists such as this.
Regards
Marshall
On May 3, 2006, at 12:23 PM, Joe Provo wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 10:38:22PM -0700, Robert Sherrard wrote:
>>
>> What make a provider a tier 2, versus a tier 1 provider...
>
> Marketing.
>
> The nomenclature is a completelyy irrelevant hangover of
> the NSFnet days when people thought in terms of "the backbone".
> If your providers' value is only in specific delicate
> contractural relationships that can vanish with little
> notice, is that really a value? You should examine carriers
> by your needs, performance, scope, reliability [human and
> network], cost, etc meaningful metrics. Get reference
> clients and query their technical staff. Get a view into
> their routing table and examine adjacenies.... if *you*
> care about a particular adjacency, press for performace
> data/trends.
>
> Joe
>
> --
> RSUC / GweepNet / Spunk / FnB / Usenix / SAGE
|
|
|