[34798] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Network for Sale
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel L. Golding)
Tue Feb 20 01:36:39 2001
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 01:27:05 -0500 (EST)
From: "Daniel L. Golding" <dan@netrail.net>
To: "Kampeas, Nick (EPIK.ORL)" <nkampeas@epik.net>
Cc: "Majdi S. Abbas" <msa@samurai.sfo.dead-dog.com>,
Alex Bligh <amb@gxn.net>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <7FC3A919DAD1D411B2E70002A50A4D9A10C248@orlmail01.feci.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0102200124370.73702-100000@courier.netrail.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Nick,
Savvis was first by a very long time. As I understand it, they cooled to
the idea after a while. InterNAP came later, and executed (at least
marketing and sales-wise), much better.
Regardless of the hype, there's a big difference between a PNAP/POP from
one of these guys, and what is conventionally thought of as a NAP.
- Daniel Golding
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001, Kampeas, Nick (EPIK.ORL) wrote:
>
> Now that you brought up that point, let me interject with two question.
> What is the difference between Internap and Savvis (short of the names and
> financial status)? Who came up with the minnaps first?
>
> Nick Kampeas
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Golding [mailto:dan@netrail.net]
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 4:20 PM
> To: Majdi S. Abbas; Alex Bligh
> Cc: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: RE: Network for Sale
>
>
>
> InterNAP has done the tier-0 marketing dance for some time. Quite
> successfully, as a matter of fact. Secret Sauce sells like hotcakes. Wall
> Street likes it as well. Not much of a performance increase, though.
>
> - Daniel Golding
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of
> > Majdi S. Abbas
> > Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 3:09 PM
> > To: Alex Bligh
> > Cc: nanog@merit.edu
> > Subject: Re: Network for Sale
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 07:51:30PM +0000, Alex Bligh wrote:
> > > If you refuse to peer with anyone at all, you can be tier-0. This
> > > can be achieved with considerable savings to phone line utilization.
> >
> > Actually, we already have a tier-0. See:
> >
> > http://www.opnix.net/perl/PressRelease.cgi?article=100032
> >
> > (And many other things on their website.)
> >
> > Particularly amusing is:
> >
> > http://www.opnix.net/whatwedo/performance.shtml
> >
> > --msa
> >
>
