[119130] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Failover how much complexity will it add?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Adam Rothschild)
Sun Nov 8 12:29:55 2009
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:29:08 -0500
From: Adam Rothschild <asr+nanog@latency.net>
To: Blake Pfankuch <bpfankuch@cpgreeley.com>
In-Reply-To: <01759D50DC387C45A018FE1817CE27D757887D7174@CPExchange1.cpgreeley.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2009-11-08-10:23:41, Blake Pfankuch <bpfankuch@cpgreeley.com> wrote:
> Make sure they operate their own network for last mile
[...]
> I wouldn't sway from the big names for your primary connections
> either.
Because ownership of the provider/subsidiary delivering the last mile
means one hand is talking to the other, and you're going to get good
service and reliability as a result? And "big names" never have any
peering-related spats and always deliver the best possible end-user
experience, right? :-)
(Some good points further on, though important we don't lead the OP
down the wrong path or with a false sense of security there...)
-a
