[68883] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Personal Co-location Registry
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Vixie)
Thu Mar 18 01:07:31 2004
To: nanog@merit.edu
From: Paul Vixie <vixie@vix.com>
Date: 18 Mar 2004 06:06:55 +0000
In-Reply-To: <40593542.5010009@txrx.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
lists@txrx.org (TxRx Lists) writes:
> > One thing you may want to devote a bit more text to: what are typical
> > provisions for remote hands at these places?
that's one item. others are serial console access, remote power cycle,
whether an appointment/escort is required for on-site visits... i can
add a row of checkboxes on every entry, but first i'm interested in
further normalizing the bandwidth column. and it's looking like i'll
need some kind of unpublished e-mail address for each submitter, since
a lot of them only advertise phone numbers and i'll need a way to ask
for updates when new columns are added. maybe this has to become a
database... yipe!
> I agree, lack of interactive access to a system prior to a functional OS
> being loaded always seemed like a potential problem area to me,
> particularly for something based on common PC architecture.
http://www.realweasel.com/ is your friend. (isc has about a dozen of 'em.)
> The main thing that's always put me off paying for colocation is the
> threat of attacks against the system, and not so much the integrity of
> the data (because obviously I wouldn't keep anything important on it)
not so obvious. my colo'd boxes have everything i care about, and they
copy it between eachother at night by cron entries. my definition of "safe"
is multiple copies on diverse power grids.
> but more the bandwidth liability. 1&1 state clearly that they account
> for every byte to/from the NIC so just one unfortunate packet flood
> could see me paying a lot more than their reasonable monthly fee...
agreed. my preference has been for bandwidth limiting and fixed prices.
--
Paul Vixie
