[190220] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: cross connects and their pound of flesh
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mike Hammett)
Sun Jun 19 10:07:36 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 09:07:27 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <201606191355.OAA17293@sunf10.rd.bbc.co.uk>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Before 100G, you'd need ten cross connects to move 100G. Now you'd need only one. That's a big drop in revenue.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest Internet Exchange
http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brandon Butterworth" <brandon@rd.bbc.co.uk>
To: bross@pobox.com, dave@temk.in
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2016 8:55:57 AM
Subject: Re: cross connects and their pound of flesh
Dave Temkin <dave@temk.in> wrote:
> And as colo operators get freaked out over margin compression on the
> impending 10->100G conversion (which is happening exponentially faster than
> 100->1G & 1G->10G) they'll need to move those levers of spend around
> regardless.
If they've based their model on extracting profit proportional
to technology speed then they've misunderstood Moore's law
brandon
