[4923] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Peering versus Transit
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alan Hannan)
Wed Oct 2 12:05:25 1996
To: freedman@netaxs.com (Avi Freedman)
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 10:52:59 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: madison@acsi.net, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199610021355.JAA01040@access.netaxs.com> from "Avi Freedman" at Oct 2, 96 09:55:47 am
From: alan@mindvision.com (Alan Hannan)
Reply-To: alan@mindvision.com (Alan Hannan)
Hi Avi,
> But what about when you add in the network engineering, monitoring,
> and maintenance you need when you run your own network? Have you
> checked out market price on clueful network people who dance with
> BGP? The cost comparison might look different then...
I am in the process of finding a dancing sponser right now. I am
not finding that the salary is really an issue at all. I dunno if
I'm not as high-priced as some (doubtful, I've rather expensive
hobbies) but the main challenge for me is/has been finding a fun
challenging network to grow in a cool environment that has a good
business plan. Not finding someone to pay me what I want :-)
I think when a company looks at paying $X-$Y gross monthly recurring,
and they know that a clever netsavvy fellow like ourselves can save
them that in utilization tricks, and can regenerate that revenue through
clueful conversation with customers, they make some rather astute
business decisions :-)
Large numbers of people are expensive, building large NOCs, support,
implementation and sales engineers has a mediumish expense when scaled.
But clueful design/expansion/transition types can have large investments.
Certainly a modicum of skill is needed in each of those areas, but
the theory and procedures (IMHO) can originate from a smallerish
source.
At least, that's what I'm seeing....
-alan
