[900] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: links on the blink (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jonathan Heiliger)
Sun Nov 5 20:03:19 1995
From: "Jonathan Heiliger" <loco@MFSDatanet.COM>
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 1995 16:52:15 -0800
In-Reply-To: "William Allen Simpson" <bsimpson@morningstar.com>
"Re: links on the blink (fwd)" (Nov 4, 10:16pm)
To: "William Allen Simpson" <bsimpson@morningstar.com>, nanog@merit.edu
On Nov 4, 10:16pm, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> My solution is to take the contracts away from MFS and Ameritech
> effective immediately, and grant them to someone who knows what they are
> doing.
>-- End of excerpt from William Allen Simpson
I have to echo Mike's comments... MFS offers the MAE interconnect service to
customers who choose to purchase it. (As far as I know)
As you infered and Mike said; portions of MAE-East are definately nearing
saturation. Specifically the shared FDDI portion which; according to my
diagram contains the MCI vBNS connection, ANS (they also have a Gigaswitch
port, however I believe their shared FDDI connection is preferred), and BBN
(keep in mind, it might not be correct :). All of these folks are sucking up a
good bit of bandwidth all their own -- combine them and you have the equivalent
of a fire hydrant pumping water through garden hoses.
Now then, I'm sure the appropriate engineering staff at each respective
organization is weighing whether to change their MAE connection to a Gigaswitch
port, connect directly to certain other NSPs, or even to build their own
exchange point. My only closing points would be that, as far as I can
determine, both Ameritech and MFS seem to be handling problems reasonably well.
One of the reasons I joined the MFS team was because of their attitude to
quickly increase service capacity and/or to respond to customer's requests.
Rather than doing things too quickly (wasting cash) or doing it too slowly and
having a bunch of un-happy customers.
speaking for myself...
-jh-
