[42933] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The backbone that sucks least?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Wed Sep 26 01:37:54 2001
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com>
Date: 25 Sep 2001 22:37:17 -0700
In-Reply-To: nanog@vo.cnchost.com's message of "25 Sep 2001 16:52:30 -0700"
Message-ID: <g3r8suecmq.fsf@as.vix.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> We have servers colocated in 8 locations, 4 each with 2 of the big-name
> colo providers, one of which made news today (no points for accurate
> guesses). We are looking at adding new server locations in a carrier
> neutral location like Equinix (who else is doing multiple carrier neutral
> locations and has available space?
paix, for one.
> Of those, who sucks least? Does paying extra for UUNET actually get you
> anything extra (better customer service, better billing/accounting service,
> better trouble ticket tracking and reporting)?
i've just got to say that uunet's monitoring and trouble ticketing is Great.
i don't know whether their backbone is good or not, but their proactive
monitoring and subsequent issue tracking is just Great, that's all, Great.
whoever set it up should definitely buy themselves a cigar, or whatever.
