[145916] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Colocation providers and ACL requests
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jay Ashworth)
Wed Oct 26 10:38:17 2011
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 10:37:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com>
To: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <CABO8Q6R+mc6ppNR+jcXS3RMADJjqrm7dVM3qUtVpxhZHVDJNxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Keegan Holley" <keegan.holley@sungard.com>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Keegan Holley" <keegan.holley@sungard.com>
> >
> > > I'm assuming colo means hosting, and the OP misspoke. Most colo
> > > providers
> > > don't provide active network for colo (as in power and rack only)
> > customers.
> >
> > Most?
>
> I'm sure there are exceptions to that rule. It's better than "YMMV".
Perhaps I look at a different category of colo provider, then, but I'm
accustomed to seeing it be well up into double-digit percentage of the ones
I've ever looked at.
"Hosting", to me, means "provider's hardware", not just "local blended bandwidth".
Cheers,
-- jr 'so many things are just me' a
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
