[31975] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: InterNAP?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Andrew Daniels)
Thu Nov 2 11:52:25 2000
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 08:36:34 -0800 (PST)
From: Andrew Daniels <adaniels@imageek.org>
To: Tom Schmidt <tsch52@hotmail.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <F84FLaqSOc7wo95EFk200005548@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0011020828091.3549-100000@eek.imageek.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
We use InterNAP as one of our providers, we've not had problems with link
status or usage of the bandwidth that has been spoken of here. The
biggest problem we have with it is the cost, while other carriers for the
most part are a lot cheaper and are considering reducing rates for
higher-capacity lines, it appears that InterNAP will have none of that.
Andrew
---
Director of Security & Network Engineering NetLedger, Inc.
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Tom Schmidt wrote:
> Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 22:41:40 GMT
> From: Tom Schmidt <tsch52@hotmail.com>
> To: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: InterNAP?
>
>
> I need your opinion on InterNAP. I am currently have a DS3 to my current
> provider and want to add an additional DS3 for redundancy to the same
> location. We plan to run BGP4 on both connections.
>
> InterNap has some technology to avoid congested peering points. Does this
> technology actually work? Isn't it impossible to avoid these peering
> points? What are your experiences with InterNAP?
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
